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

I just think at some point we have to stop pretending that what we do has anything to do with what Deadspin does. Even if readers are too lazy to understand the difference. Do we express this kind of anger when TMZ or US Weekly writes about cheating celebrities, no matter how minor they are? If you're going to rip Deadspin for this, and you certainly can and probably should, you better never be so shameless as to give The Big Lead and interview just because you can't turn down the ego stroke. Same probably goes for the New York Post.

 

I agree with you, but I'd point out that not even TMZ and USweekly will publish what "samsamsmith" emailed them with no corroboration and a declaration up front that they're just throwing shit against the wall out of vengeance. Yesterday Deadspin lowered the bar even by gossip rag standards.

 

I agree with you on that, mustangj. Blogging done well is not a bad thing in and of itself.

I just worry that, more and more, people are becoming desensitized to and uncaring of the differences between true blogging and a traditional news-gathering and news-presentation format.

When done right, they are different. But that fact is becoming blurred, sometimes even to journalists, because they are using their blogs, essentially, like just electronic newspapers that happen to be called blogs.

Current circumstances dictate that, because newspapers don't have the space they used to have, and the availability of a blog is a convenient avenue to address the problem and provide a place to stick the "leftovers" and overflow. But that is not truly a blog.

So, the differences between the formats and information is not obvious, especially not to a sometimes inattentive, imperceptive and uncaring general public that is getting used to the new ways and expectations, and may need such delineation to be clear and stated.

And the fact that even traditional newspapers are going for more voyeurism, celebrity news and social networking on their Web sites these days doesn't do much to help strengthen in the public's eye any separation that might still exist between us and "them."

 

Very well put.

 

"Hey Daulerio . . .I thought this was gonna be a big day!"

"Uh . . .it sort of was. We exposed ESPN."

"Not even close. Do we have anything else?"

"Geez, I don't know."

"I'm at a loss."

"Me too."

 

You don't know how many sources they have. They may just have an email or two, they may have copies of the people's employee HR file.

I seriously doubt Deadspin/Gawker would have printed this based off a semi-anonymous email. I'm guessing someone in the know contacted them and they have proof, but they're protecting the source.

If you think otherwise, email them and tell them Berman fondled you at a concert in 1987 and see if they print it.

 

What - no black tacos ?

 

"Hey, I know, let's post a drunken poop story!"

"Brilliant!"

 

Which one's Leather?

 

Daulerio once published what he claims was a text message he read over Stuart Scott's shoulder.

 

ESPN responds: