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

Multiple e-mails about the same subject does not confirm anything when you consider that the multiple e-mails might be coming from the same subject. It takes literally two seconds to create a new e-mail address, either at GMail, Hotmail or wherever.....

So, it's very possible that the "multiple" e-mails are coming from one person.

All that said, Go Deadspin GO!

 

My basis for wanting ESPN to hang them by their nuts in litigation is the statement basically saying that they didn't give a shit if the accusations were true or not, they were throwing them against the wall anyway. That's textbook actual malice. Why the fuck would you announce that?

On the non-legal side, Deadspin is a douche for bragging about how it was going to empty its inbox yesterday, then posting two mundane stories and then boasting about how the entire plan, from the outset, was to make everyone in Bristol worried. So essentially Deadspin was making public threats to punish ESPN for a private wrong (lying about Phillips) and taking everyone for a ride in order to do so? Grow the fuck up.

 

Yeah, I was expecting a little bit more as well. Their inbox wasn't quite as full as I was hoping.

 

ESPN will never sue Deadspin.

NEVER. They might try to scare Deadspin, but there is no way they would sue.

There is no way in hell they would want their employees deposed on how things work there.

 

I will agree that if there isn't more to come, I will be a bit disappointed.

 

Do you mean Eric Kuselias' alleged line? Or is it on tape somewhere to prove he said it, or has he acknowledged saying it?

Because otherwise ... well, I really don't need to say it, do I?

 

Agreed. Gawker's lawyers must've shit their pants when they saw that Daulerio had chosen that wording. When an applicable legal standard is "reckless disregard for truth" it's kind of a nice idea not to admit in print to exactly that.

 

You are doing a lot of guessing there. Just like Deadspin. And at least one of your guesses, that the reaction to this is fake, is dead wrong. That's the problem with guessing in print. It's far too easy to be wrong.

My reaction isn't fake. I find Deadspin's work yesterday to be despicable. They basically admitted that they were going to post rumors they couldn't confirm. They just decided not to care because mean old ESPN didn't confirm a story for them. Whiny, childish and careless. They have a public forum and they abused it for their own amusement and personal bullshit. It is extremely disappointing that any journalist would defend such a lack of integrity. Not surprising, but disappointing.

 

OK, have there been any statements from ESPN denying Deadspin's allegations? Because if they had accused me of doing something like that and I was innocent, I would be screaming it from the rooftops.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

 

I heard from an anonymous source that Steve Phillips said that the intern he was intimate with is at least a 6 and just doesn't photograph well.

 

So, it's okay to print whatever we want as long as the person we write about doesn't immediately start screaming? Or maybe, just maybe, ESPN wants to be absolutely sure of the facts before responding. Or maybe they are just hoping it quietly goes away. Weren't you the one saying that ESPN made the Erin Andrews thing worse by reacting? Now you are using the lack of reaction, less than a day later, as evidence that what Deadspin did is appropriate.

Bottom line: You don't think integrity in reporting is important. That is evident on this thread and many others.

 

Well, we know from his time with the Mets that he's a terrible judge of talent. ;D