Deadspin posts the Favre pics. Ugh.

As far as Sterger's motivations, I think we have to chalk it up to naivete. Here is the original explanation of how the topic came up. They were chatting at a Super Bowl party, one joke led to another, etc.

http://deadspin.com/5603701/brett-favre-once-sent-me-cock-shots-not-a-love-story

People are just going to have to realize, and probably accept, that there are "reporters" out there who don't give a damn about "off-the-record" or "overheard in a bar" or "looking over someone's shoulder." And I'm not going to make a moral judgment about Daulerio, or pretend that he's all that's wrong with new media, because there have been reporters/writers/gossip hounds like him since the printing press was invented. It just is. And there will always be an appetite for this kind of story, no matter how many people gripe that they, personally, would never read this swill.

It's clear Nick Denton wants his bloggers to push the envelope in the name of hits. Guess how many hits the first Favre story got? 1.6 million.

Guess how many the one with actual voice mails and cock shots got? 2.78 million. And counting.

Deadspin gets around, I believe, 4 million page views per month. So with one story (if you combine the two posts), he increased Deadspin's traffic this month by around 110 percent.

[EDIT: Screwed up the original percentage.]

There's the motivation right there. This story made Gawker media money. Pure and simple. I don't think Daulerio sat there with a calculator twisting beeswax into his mustache trying to figure out the financial gain he could achieve by burning Sterger. But he knew she was already one of those Internet All-Stars whom people decry, but also can't get enough of, and when combined with Favre Fatigue and all the Favre Hatred out there in cyberspace, he probably realized it would be something close to the perfect storm for web hits. To him, if you factor in what he's been asked/encouraged to do, that was totally worth dicking over Sterger. Even if Gawker gets sued and has to settle, they might come out ahead financially.

Everyone, even Deadspin commenters, likes to bitch about Daulerio and say he's ruined Deadspin and that it's turned into a harem of slimeballs since Leitch left. And I concede, the standards have fallen considerably since Leitch departed.

But guess what? Hits are way up. Makes you a little sad, but these kind of decisions are only being rewarded by John and Jane Q. Public.

We're basically in different businesses, Daulerio and I. He'll print anything, true or not, and acknowledge that it might not be true, and he'll pay sources and acknowledge that he pays sources. I've come to terms with that.

It's not worth it to get too upset about it, because again ... we don't work in the same business.

It's a huge portion of the generally public that can't figure that out, or, more likely, doesn't care.

 

Or John and Jane Q Pubic.

 

Ok, that was well played, Mizzou.

 

DD -- very well thought-out post. You are right, the key is to separate what Daulerio does from what we do.

With all you've said, though, here's my problem: None of us know what the NFL has discovered and confirmed on its own, and yet people are already leaping to discuss how many games Favre should be suspended. For all the reasons you've stated -- especially "he'll print anything, true or not, and acknowledge that it might not be true" -- it is very very dangerous for the NFL to suspend Brett Favre solely because of what's on Deadspin. People have brought up Roethlisberger; the enormous difference there, as I've previously mentioned, is the incredibly damaging police report. We have no such documentation here. We only have what the sports world's Perez Hilton says happened.

If the NFL has its own goods, then OK, let's see what kind of discipline needs to happen. But who's to say the NFL has anything on its own or even wants it? Remember, this is the group that destroyed all the Spygate evidence. They are very, very good at killing the clock on stories like these.

 

Exactly.

I never said I thought he was innocent. But where's the proof that the johnson in the posted photos is his?

The photos that were posted don't match the description of the photos Daulerio mentioned in the original Deadspin post, the one that DD excerpted.

Where are the Crocs?

 

I'm in total agreement that Favre should not be suspended unless the NFL confirms it independently. If you believe otherwise, you're letting Favre hatred cloud your judgement. I was only writing what I wrote to discuss the media related aspect of the "scandal."

Also worth pointing out that, in the original post by Daulerio, he made a big deal about the fact that Sterger said you could see a watch like the one Favre wears in the cell phone shots, but that's not true. The photos are either cropped so you can't see that it's a watch like Favre's, or it's just a random watch.

I can't believe I'm going at Zapruder Film on dong photos, but there it is.

 

How'd you like to be the guy that has to confirm this is Favre's dong? They only way to do it is with visual evidence.

"Ok Brett, drop 'em."

 

Has the Michael Jackson pic already been posted? I feel like it has.

 

Assuming its true ...

Why do these morons do this? Honest to God, why? Greg Oden. Grady Sizemore. George Hill. Riley Skinner. Santonio Holmes.

 

Athletes chasing women is nothing new.

Now there are new options to facilitate the process.

Technology marches on.

 

In Oden's case, it was a photo released by a former girlfriend. That's a bit more understandable. Beyond that, who knows. Guess athletes just love their dongs and want others to see em.

 

Chris Cooley.