It seems Deadspin is about to go guns blazing at ESPN re: sex rumors

I imagine a lot of lawyers have been conferring throughout the course of the day. May have put a damper on Daulerio's vision of how today would play out...

 

Shocking, huh?

 

Why does it make a difference if it's a sports outlet?

Sites like TBL and Deadspin don't pretend to be Grantland Rice, they're not sportswriters, they're essentially gossip columnists that specialize in sports figures. Subject to the exact same legal standards as news and entertainment gossip columnists.

 

Got as far as the Kuselias 'I would like to fuck you' thing, and skipped to the end to say this:

You have to be kidding to think this is unique or special to espn. Every woman (and some men) on this board has stories that would make these sound like fairy tales. Most of us, however, don't chronicle these events with surreptitious emails to gossip websites.

Not excusing any of the behavior. Just saying, it didn't begin at espn, and it sure as hell won't end there.

 

I don't think you get to brag here, dude. You said they wouldn't have the guts to go through with it, at all, then they did, and now because it's been a trickle instead of a blast, you're acting smug? Weak.

 

But I can't believe for a second that they didn't already have clearance from those lawyers beforehand. No way they post that without running it by Gawker's legal people first.

 

I must say: Eric Kuselias' line made me laugh out loud. Completely inappropriate, yes, but hilarious because of how pathetic it is.

My friend used that line once on a friend of a friend of a friend who was at a small gathering at my house. Shockingly, it didn't work.

 

Oh, I agree. But I'm sure they had to respond to various challenges throughout the course of the day from ESPN...so things may have stalled. But I have no clue. Either Daulerio was delusional or something happened. He promised a giant wave. Not a drip.

 

What OOP said.

And that goes for all involved, on every level in the both the playing out and publicizing of these dramas.

I read the original link, but not some of the others included on this thread.

So, what happened to Brooke Hundley as a result of her escapades with Phillips? Anything?

As bad a Phillips and others may be, she sounds like a real winner...and she is/was an ESPN employee, too.

 

Subject to the same legal standards, sure, and I believe today Mr. Daulerio is putting those standards to the test. However, some of these sites apparently do not adhere to the same ethical standards. Both sites have "reported" things that I would venture to say many on this board would lose their jobs over, and today's stunt was something done maliciously that could tarnish people's lives.

Furthermore, running with such damaging accusations with no evidence beyond unsubstantiated emails (one from "samsamsmith" for crying out loud) isn't acceptable -- even for a "gossip columnist." I can understand running anonymous source stories on government happenings because the voting public needs that information. No one needs to know the sexual exploits of a mid-manager that even the author acknowledges isn't a newsworthy person.

 

Here you go, Songbird:



I agree that it's dangerous for Deadspin to put itself out there like this. It's why I hate when journalists say "We're WATCHDOGS!!!!!" Because in that case, someone will be very happy to bring you down.

I don't care if Deadspin finishes this or not. I don't read the site except when it's linked here. At the same time, this actually had the potential to be a fascinating read, since going with Kuselias first had the mark of starting with the small fry and moving up the ladder, as some have said.

But it's now 6:30 p.m. in New York and Bristol. Maybe Deadspin didn't have anything.

Or the lawyers made them Wocka Wocka away from this.

 

I, like most of you, find this to be flat out weak. But here's a question for somebody with a legal background. When, if ever, is the government going regulate blogs and sites like these from "reporting" this kind of stuff?

I mean, papers can't do it, and the authors of books can be sued for libel. I understand the first amendment and whatnot, but how is this not defamation of charachter?