ESPN.com to launch "Heat Index"

[RainMaker]

Not Heat related, but ESPN related. So they covered the Ines Sainz controversy to naseauting proportions. But one of the biggest names in pro football sends pictures of his dick to a sideline reporter and nothing.

So does ESPN have a list of players they are allowed to cover negatively and those they aren't?

[spleen1015]

Who did that?

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Who did that?

Brett Favre

Favre declines to talk about voice messages, photos | ProFootballTalk.com

Original Deadspin story: 'Brett Favre Once Sent Me Cock Shots': Not A Love Story

[stevew]

They had a gag order on their peeps in regards to LeBron's mom ridin' West.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Not Heat related, but ESPN related. So they covered the Ines Sainz controversy to naseauting proportions. But one of the biggest names in pro football sends pictures of his dick to a sideline reporter and nothing.

So does ESPN have a list of players they are allowed to cover negatively and those they aren't?

I'm sure that ESPN has collective knowledge of a billion weird sex stories involving athletes. I understand why they don't go there. They need positive relationships with athletes. The sex "scandals" they actually talk about tend to have some official, public designation, either legally, or discipline-wise.

If Favre got suspended, or was criminally charged - that would be a 24/7 story. Do you really want ESPN to lead sportscenter with a story about some NBA star having a four-way with two other girls and a guy?

People say ESPN loves Favre, but I don't think they care one way or the other - they know WE care about Bret Favre (we either love him or hate him, largely), and people can't enough. I'm sure they have research that shows a Brett Favre hater spends more time watching their pieces on Brett Favre than anyone else.

[jbergey22]

Will I care about this? No. Will other people care about this? Of course.

I have no issues with ESPN making money. Some people may despise what they have turned into but they have taken sports to a whole new level.

The biggest reason Im pissed about the Heat is that no longer will Dwayne Wade be a dominant fantasy player I could build my team around every year and always do well.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

I'm sure that ESPN has collective knowledge of a billion weird sex stories involving athletes. I understand why they don't go there. They need positive relationships with athletes. The sex "scandals" they actually talk about tend to have some official, public designation, either legally, or discipline-wise.

If Favre got suspended, or was criminally charged - that would be a 24/7 story. Do you really want ESPN to lead sportscenter with a story about some NBA star having a four-way with two other girls and a guy?

People say ESPN loves Favre, but I don't think they care one way or the other - they know WE care about Bret Favre (we either love him or hate him, largely), and people can't enough. I'm sure they have research that shows a Brett Favre hater spends more time watching their pieces on Brett Favre than anyone else.

They just spent an entire week talking about how some Jets players made cat-calls at a reporter in the locker room. That was worthy of coverage but when one of the biggest names in the NFL and a member of the Jets at the time sent unsolicited pictures of his dick to a reporter it's not?

I just hate hypocrites. Remember that this company also spiked a story about Lebron going out on the town and not looking that great from a public image standpoint. But now "The Heat Index" has a section devoted to the nightlife. Or how about when sexual assault allegations were made against Big Ben and they didn't bother to cover it till later on when they picked up more steam (despite every other news outlet covering it). It's just faux journalism.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They just spent an entire week talking about how some Jets players made cat-calls at a reporter in the locker room. That was worthy of coverage but when one of the biggest names in the NFL and a member of the Jets at the time sent unsolicited pictures of his dick to a reporter it's not?

I just hate hypocrites. Remember that this company also spiked a story about Lebron going out on the town and not looking that great from a public image standpoint. But now "The Heat Index" has a section devoted to the nightlife. Or how about when sexual assault allegations were made against Big Ben and they didn't bother to cover it till later on when they picked up more steam (despite every other news outlet covering it). It's just faux journalism.

I don't think there's strict rules when ESPN had a moral obligation to report about scandalous things in a player's person life. ESPN, like I said, I'm sure sits on 99.9% of the the info that it comes across about athletes doing pervy things. And yes, they certainly chose not to be the leader in those stories, but the followers. I would have the exact same philosophy if I were them. If there's a big trade, ESPN wants to be first. If it's a pro athlete throwing his dick around where it shouldn't be - they'll let someone else be first and deal with it when it already has become an actual story they can't avoid. (And NYC had the locker room thing, so there was going to be no ignoring that - and for some reason, women-being-harassed-in-the-locker room stories have been newsworthy in the U.S. for decades going back to Lisa Olson (another story that an aggressive regional media, and not ESPN, made big).

If you want a sports/entertainment/provider who is first to report sleaze, you want Deadspin.com, not ESPN. ESPN chooses not to be the national leader of athlete dick news, and that's probably a good decision for business and for establishing and maintaining important relationships with athletes (who are the sources of other news).

I don't think sports by its nature is something that lends itself to "journalism", because it's part of the entertainment industry. But every reputable news organization you can think of makes similar, strategic decisions about what news they cover and what news they don't.

There's no easy answer, for any sports news organizations, about when to pull the trigger and make an athlete's private life public. But usually, something in sports has to be impacted - someone's going to jail and can't play, someone's getting disciplined by their team, etc. The Favre thing just sounds like the result of an affair-breakup. LeBron was just a young rich guy having fun. I'm not sure where exactly that line is, but just because ESPN is talking about the locker-room-gate story that's running wild in NYC doesn't mean they have a moral obligation to tell us all about Favre's dick. I don't see that connection at all. (I don't think ESPN needs to think, "ya, a lot of our guys are talking about that NYC locker room lady - we better dig up that old Favre story about his dick from last year and lead sportscenter with it so everything's fair").

[RainMaker]

I'm not saying they should or shouldn't report sleaze. I'm saying I'd like them to do it fairly. If you're going to report harrasment of reporters, do it when it's a couple guys in the locker room making comments and when it's a star QB sending cock pics.

And you're acting like ESPN has always stood back during these times. They reported on Michael Vick being sued for giving someone herpes. The same goes for Jose Lima and others. Tiger Woods received blanket coverage for having affairs on his wife. Like I said, ESPN reports on sleaze all the time.

The difference is that it's not universal. They literally ignored the Big Ben stories for weeks until it finally boiled over and they were forced to report it. They were the only network not reporting on it. Yet individuals like Kirby Puckett, Jerome Bettis, and Kobe Bryant weren't afforded that luxury (before they were charged). ESPN has even reported on Shaq and others paying hush money to women. Guys like Shawn Kemp and Travis Henry having children out of wedlock and issues with child support.

So this isn't about ESPN holding their journalism to a higher standard. It's picking and choosing which athletes they report on and don't report on. Remember that there was an internal memo that told ESPN reporters to NOT report on the Big Ben story at the start. Maybe Kobe would have had that benefit if he played in the NFL, was more friendly with ESPN, or just white.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by SteveBollea

To be fair, that was nothing but speculation and locker room gossip. With Favre, we have actual pictures of his lil' Brett.

True.

I'm still getting a "You can head south, but your mom rides WEST" shirt.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by stevew

True.

I'm still getting a "You can head south, but your mom rides WEST" shirt.

That's awesome. Since we have D-Train now can we get those shirts in Boston too??

[molson]

Favre sending pictures of little Brett - not ESPN Newsworthy

But the second the NFL gets involved - ESPN Newsworthy:

NFL reviewing allegations of racy Brett Favre messages - ESPN

I think a lot of this is initiated by the ESPN legal department. There's a huge difference in legal exposure between reporting that Favre did something pervy, and reporting that the NFL is looking into Favre doing something pervy.

Without the potential discipline angle, all you have is, "some lady told us that Favre is sending her pictures of his dick." That's not anything. Unless you're deadspin.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm not saying they should or shouldn't report sleaze. I'm saying I'd like them to do it fairly. If you're going to report harrasment of reporters, do it when it's a couple guys in the locker room making comments and when it's a star QB sending cock pics.

And you're acting like ESPN has always stood back during these times. They reported on Michael Vick being sued for giving someone herpes. The same goes for Jose Lima and others. Tiger Woods received blanket coverage for having affairs on his wife. Like I said, ESPN reports on sleaze all the time.

The difference is that it's not universal. They literally ignored the Big Ben stories for weeks until it finally boiled over and they were forced to report it. They were the only network not reporting on it. Yet individuals like Kirby Puckett, Jerome Bettis, and Kobe Bryant weren't afforded that luxury (before they were charged). ESPN has even reported on Shaq and others paying hush money to women. Guys like Shawn Kemp and Travis Henry having children out of wedlock and issues with child support.

So this isn't about ESPN holding their journalism to a higher standard. It's picking and choosing which athletes they report on and don't report on. Remember that there was an internal memo that told ESPN reporters to NOT report on the Big Ben story at the start. Maybe Kobe would have had that benefit if he played in the NFL, was more friendly with ESPN, or just white.

But again, they have been picking and choosing for years especially when it come to the NFL. Remember that series about the pro football league that hit a little too close to reality for the NFL? Guess what, they are not the only ones who do it. If you think Fox, CBS and NBC will be spending a great deal of time reporting on little Brett, you are fooling yourself. In fact a quick glance at the various websites and the only people who are pushing this story beyond what ESPN is are Deadspin and Jason Whitlock.