The Ben Roethlisberger Sexual Assault Allegations: Where Do the Honchos at ESPN and ESPN.com Hide Now? Darnell Dockett Blows UP ESPN via Twitter

Update: Darnell Dockett blows up ESPN via Twitter…

1. When kobe bryant got accuse I HEARD ABOUT THAT ISH 50 straight days and he was found not guilty, why haven’t I heard about ben I’m pissedWTFabout 13 hours ago from UberTwitter
2. I don’t care if they showed oit a few times, plaxico was all the news and he shot his own self, and I got to here about big ben on twitter,about 13 hours ago from UberTwitter
3. 1. Kobe bryant,miketyson,deshawn steveson, when they got sex charges it hit the news but I wonder why not BIG BEN let me find out we in the 70sabout 13 hours ago from UberTwitter
   2. QB pittburgh steelers got a sex assault and the news aint even report it, hmm they reported viking boat party, vick dog fighting.- POLITICSabout 13 hours ago from UberTwitter
   3. man ben rosinlberlger or how ever thew hell u spelled it got a rape charge against him but if that would of been mike vick he be on the newsabout 13 hours ago from UberTwitter

Ouch! No wonder ESPN felt compelled to begin reporting the allegations against Roethlieberger. When athletes start blowing you up publicly, and they are talking with other athletes ————- there’s nothing but trouble ahead.

————————————————

The hubbub over ESPN’s failure to devote one second of coverage to Andrea McNulty’s civil suit against Ben Roethlisberger has reached epic proportions. From the Philadelphia Inquirer to the Wall Street Journal, columnists and reporters are asking the Big Subliminal, why?

Well, ESPN just decided to hop into the fray – with both feet. According to the latest SportsCenter reports, the television network will devote a full day’s coverage to the allegations against Roethlisberger. That means we’ll be hearing about Big Ben from Mike and Mike in the Morning straight through to Thursday’s final SportsCenter. Vince Doria, ESPN Senior VP of News explained the decision this way:

“[It is] big and we think it’s an important story. The elements of it are compelling. You’ve got the most successful team [in the history of football]…. and they’re (the Steelers) determined to pay the greatest [quarterback] of today’s era a huge amount of money. All this is happening in the heavily populated Northeast corridor here, which includes a large number of viewers, so we believe there’s great interest in the story and that’s why we’ve given it the attention we have.”

Too bad for Doria and his television network that this conversation never took place. Well, it did. It’s just that the year was 2007 (May 31) and Doria was describing to Sports Business Daily why ESPN chose to speak Roger Clemens’  name once a minute, or so it seemed, for a full day:

Doria said the Clemens comeback is “big and we think it’s an important story. The elements of it are compelling. You’ve got the most successful team in the history of baseball here in the throes of a miserable slump. (The Yankees are) on the verge of missing the playoffs for the first time in 12 years, and they’re determined to pay the greatest pitcher of our era at least a prorated $28[M] to pitch roughly two-thirds of a season, and now, in the 23 days since they’ve signed him, they’ve gone from 5.5 games out to 14.5 games out. All this is happening in the heavily populated Northeast corridor here, which includes a large number of viewers, so we believe there’s great interest in the story and that’s why we’ve given it the attention we have.”

Actually, as of the writing of this article, neither ESPN nor ESPN.com has mentioned the allegations against Roethlisberger. On July 22 a reporter from Sports Business Daily got a chance to find out why. A spokesperson from the network said:

“As far as we know, this is a civil lawsuit that Roethlisberger has yet to address publicly.”

Andrea McNulty.

However, the spokesperson lied. Well, he didn’t technically lie —————– but he lied. No, Roethlisberger himself did not address the allegations but his attorney, David Cornwell, who was once the NFL’s general counsel, did address the issue:

Cornwell said in a written statement issued late Monday that Roethlisberger “has never sexually assaulted anyone.”

Cornwell also said in the statement: “The timing of the lawsuit and the absence of a criminal complaint and a criminal investigation are the most compelling evidence of the absence of any criminal conduct. If an investigation is commenced, Ben will cooperate fully and Ben will be fully exonerated.

“Ben will not be baited into a public discussion about his personal life, but we will defend him vigorously. The limited value that [the plaintiff] derived from public disclosure of these viciously false allegations is the only value she will ever receive from Ben in this case.”

Since Cornwell is the legal representing for Roethlisberger, it is as if Roethlisberger is, himself, speaking. So, yes the anonymous ESPN spokesperson lied.

Next, the Philadelphia Inquirer‘s John Gonzalez took his shot at explaining the ESPN-Roethlisberger saga. Gonzalez admitted right up front that he is miffed at ESPN’s decision to not cover the Roethlisberger story:

No matter how many times they’re explained, some things just don’t make sense: Advanced calculus. Cold Fusion. Turtle (Jerry Ferrara) dating Meadow Soprano (Jamie-Lynn Sigler).

The way ESPN has failed to cover the controversy surrounding Ben Roethlisberger is the same sort of impossible-to-understand noggin-scratcher. On Monday, news broke of a civil lawsuit filed in Nevada on July 17 by a woman alleging she was sexually assaulted by the Steelers quarterback. Since then, the story has been covered by the Associated Press, CBSSports.com, Yahoo, Pro Football Talk (now owned by NBC), Fox News, and other national media outlets.

Gonzalez took his confusion to ESPN and received the same flimsy excuse as reported in the Sports Business Daily, with a little added flourish:

“At this point, we are not reporting the allegations against Ben Roethlisberger because no criminal complaint has been filed,” an ESPN spokesman told me. “As far as we know, this is a civil lawsuit that Roethlisberger has yet to address publicly.”

Apparently Gonzalez did not know that Cornwell gave a statement as in the following paragraph the Inquirer columnist wrote:

That’s true. Roethlisberger hasn’t addressed it publicly. And it doesn’t look like he’s going to any time soon. The Steelers canceled a news conference scheduled for tomorrow that was designed to promote Roethlisberger’s involvement with Shaquille O’Neal’s new reality show.

However, Gonzalez remained confused:

But since when has an athlete’s silence or lack of cooperation prevented ESPN from covering a story? And Roethlisberger may not have addressed the civil suit, but his lawyer denied the claim on Roethlisberger’s behalf and told the AP the quarterback will be “fully exonerated.” Sure sounds like he’s aware of what’s happening.

The sticking point for ESPN seems to be that the woman in question filed a civil suit instead of criminal charges. But a quick review of ESPN’s reporting history shows the company has covered several civil suits recently, including those filed against former Cowboy Adam “Pacman” Jones, former baseball star Roberto Alomar, and Lakers point guard Shannon Brown.

So the columnist went up the ESPN food chain to Doria. He received this statement from the ESPN VP:

Each situation is different,” Doria said, adding that ESPN will continue to look at the Roethlisberger situation on a daily basis. “I can give you all sorts of examples of civil suits we have and haven’t covered.”

Oh really?

And then Doria proceeded to give Gonzalez examples of ESPN passing on civil suits involving athletes, particularly high-profile athletes like Ben Roethlisberger. No. Gonzalez gave no examples in his column so it can be assumed Doria offered no explicit instances of ESPN passing on reporting a civil suit against an athlete.

It is now known that there was a “no report” memo passed around the ESPN family of sports media networks. But Gonzalez found an exception to the rule:

Yesterday, Pro Football Talk reported that ESPN issued a “do not report” memo to all of its outlets and reporters” essentially commanding them to avoid the Roethlisberger story. An ESPN spokesman said that’s because the WWL wants all of its entities to handle stories the same way. That makes sense. What doesn’t make sense, at all, is that on the same day ESPN issued the “do not report” memo, the company cleared its radio station in Pittsburgh – which, unlike the affiliate here in Philadelphia, is owned and operated by the corporate big boys in Bristol – to discuss the Roethlisberger controversy.

Now how does that track?

Good question. The answer, perhaps, is that it is impossible to not discuss the alleged incident on a Pittsburgh radio station; the locals would go crazy. A better reason might be that despite the no report memo Doria and producers at ESPN could not resist the urge to win the listener battle in Pittsburgh. Perhaps the radio station employees in Pittsburgh were not informed of the memo; perhaps they were informed and were told to keep quiet. Either way, if the ESPN affiliate in Pittsburgh went about its business as usual, the local press would pay little or no attention to a report from the outside that there was a no report memo concerning Ben Roethlisberger. The press would think Mike Florio or his source was lying and as a result, they too would remain mum on that front. That way ESPN could capture its usual share of listeners in Pittsburgh where, true or not the allegations have has legs, while keeping the story at arm’s length everywhere else in the U.S.

But for Doria there is proof that he is a liar who actually believes he can tell the public anything and get away with utter falsehoods. ESPN led the way with their reporting that former MLB star Roberto Alomar gave his girlfriend AIDS ——— according to a civil suit she filed.

Yet neither Doria at ESPN and Rob King at ESPN.com never felt compelled to apologize when one of their own reported that the suit was dismissed.

And remember how Bill Belichick was raked through the mud and his team was called a farce during the “Spygate” episode because of a wholly unsubstantiated rumor that the Patriots filmed the St. Louis Rams final walk-through before the Super Bowl? Has a public apology been offered after ESPN and ESPN.com so very publicly lied to viewers and readers and slandered Belichick and, by extension the entire New England Patriots organization?

Did ESPN show restraint when Doria commandeered the second-by-second coverage Kobe Bryant received when faced with allegations eerily similar to those alleged by McNulty? Did Doria look at those allegations, compare them with those with which Roethlisberger is charged and think, ‘wow, we need to give this some air time because, for better or worse, the two incidents appear to be very similar.’ 

Hell no.

When the truth comes out and the Big Subliminal is found out, people like Doria and King hide behind their titles and become unapproachable. The network and .com turn to their next prey without blinking, giving the impression their fabrications never existed.

The kid glove treatment of Ben Roethlisberger is ESPN’s modus operandi. This and similar behavioral traits, especially when pertaining to White athletes, but ultimately any athlete under the Disney umbrella (see Shaquille O’Neal) have been outlined ad nauseum over the three years of Sports On My Mind’s existence. Here it has been made known that any athlete, White, Black, or other who thumbs his or her nose at the Big Disney will get pilloried – just ask Chad Pennington.

Now, though, with the refusal to report McNulty’s allegations, it would seem that no sane sports writer around the country can turn his or her back on these behaviors. Unfortunately, one reporter who has a stellar mainstream reputation but is viewed here as is a viper in the grass, found a way to defend the self-proclaimed Worldwide Leader:

Roethlisberger, for those of you who don’t know (and you wouldn’t know for more than a day if your only source of sports information is ESPN), is being accused of rape in a civil suit. Civil suit. Not criminal. It is an important distinction, if you care about fairness. I have no idea if this woman was terribly and criminally wronged or is insane. I just know she can say whatever she wants in a civil suit without making it so. The temptation is to report what she says, and file it under journalistic “fact-gathering” or “truth-seeking,” even though the media, allegedly fair and objective, is never, ever, ever as zealous or thorough in reporting the acquittal as it is in reporting the accusation.

Let’s make it your brother, your father or you instead of Roethlisberger. And let’s say, for the sake of argument, that you are being wrongly accused in a civil suit. And then that “news” is everywhere, smearing you, but the exoneration isn’t reported with the same gossipy hyperventilation. That going to feel fair? The need to be first long ago trampled the need to be just or right or just right. The need to get the conversation going in the instant-media age has usurped the need to have the conversation be fair or human or empathetic.

Asking the media to slow down on Roethlisberger until he at least speaks or until police are involved is like asking piranha to be reasonable. Doesn’t help, either, that the voices gathering strength on the Internet are shouting for more bloody chum to be thrown in the water. The temptation as the crowd gathers around the peephole is to wander over toward the whispers.

Which makes what ESPN did kind of amazing in the modern media age. It totally ignored this Roethlisberger story before finally bowing Wednesday night. Everyone else was reporting it. Everyone. And consumers crave it. The famous falling is always a ratings monster. Michael Jackson’s death wouldn’t have been covered that way if media outlets weren’t being rewarded for covering it that way by the paying public.

But predictably, ESPN was killed for protecting Roethlisberger. Covered for him instead of covering him. All ESPN was doing was waiting for him to speak or for police to get involved. But we want our gossip, even if it is not true, and our need for it makes TMZ and smut rags grow while books and newspapers and literary magazines die. It is one of the many ways America keeps getting dumber by the day. And, in this climate, it makes the high ground an awfully difficult place to be.

Dan LeBatard, a columnist for the Miami Herald, eats from ESPN’s plate as easily as a champion pork rib eater – only now it is apparent that he eats more than his share and must become a shill for the network in exchange for an easy Pardon the Interruption paycheck.

I could understand LeBatard calling America dumb if he had the guts to call out names of those with an agenda such as the competitors ESPN has trampled through the years that now get to do some stomping of their own. I could understand it if he spotlighted Mike Florio’s prior ESPN and NFL league office bootlicking and straw-sucking, his propensity for engaging in thinly-veiled racist speak, and the fact that he now is allied with a network competitor of ESPN.

But LeBatard plays the role of metrosexual liberal with ease most of the time – except when it come to making live televised statements on PTI about hoping Fidel Castro was dead when those reports ran rampant throughout the news media. Except for times like now when it is plain that ESPN is playing favorites rather than showing restraint.

You see, had Doria or King, after one of their failed Inquisition-like public floggings and beheadings of athletes like Alomar or coaches like Belichick, made a public apology and said…

“We have wronged out final athlete. In the pursuit of sensationalism to push the needle of viewership and readership and being the first to file a news item, our actions are much more irresponsible than those of the athletes and coaches actions we misrepresented.

From this moment on when presented with allegations about a sports figure we will adhere to strict journalism standards in our reporting, even if it means we are last to report a news item. At least we will know we got the story right, plus in being thorough about our reporting it will allow our journalists to provide viewers and readers with much more insightful glimpses into the minds of the sports figures we cover. In the end, we will be doing everyone involved the service of disseminating news and not wild rumors, which, after all, is our intended goal.

…columnists like LeBatard could proudly write about ESPN’s restraint in the matter of Ben Roethlisberger.

Now though, LeBatard looks much more like a common street whore. And his pimp is wearing a big, gold, diamond-encrusted chain that reads:

Entertainment and Sports Programming Network.

Welcome to the cast, Danny boy. 

And to those sports fans who brayed to the sky that ESPN somehow does not have an agenda other than to make money like any other business or corporation, you can open your eyes now.

You’re not in Kansas anymore.

—————————————————-

And kudos to Byran Burwell…

And if this woman has falsely accused Roethlisberger, then she is the one who ought to go to jail, and for a long time to send a message that wrongful suits ought to carry a stiff penalty, too. 

Yet another rather curious aspect of the Roethlisberger story is the story itself. While every other major sports news operation has reported that the lawsuit has been filed, the biggest sports news organization in the country — media giant ESPN — has been mysteriously silent. 


The same network that gave the Bryant case intense wall-to-wall coverage had failed to report anything about the Roethlisberger civil suit as of early Tuesday evening. Why ESPN chose to stay on the sidelines on this developing news story is a puzzle. According to Pro Football Talk.com, which originally reported the lawsuit, ESPN news executives issued a “do not report” directive to all its outlets and reporters, instructing them not to discuss the case. (In the interest of full disclosure, I am employed by an ESPN-affiliated radio station and also appear on many of ESPN’s studio shows.)



Perhaps the network believed it was exercising good news judgment by refusing to initially leap on this story without at least examining some of the more shocking details of the civil suit (I happen to agree with that measured response). However, they left themselves open to a boatload of second-guessing once the lawsuit became public by countless other news organizations that meticulously and professionally laid it out without turning it into a needlessly salacious tabloid report. there is a difference between responsible journalism and blatantly sitting on the sidelines while a story passes you by.

Even if you believe the story is bogus, you have to report it or you open yourself up to charges of biased coverage. You know what’s going to happen next, don’t you? 

ESPN is now going to have to spend a lot of time explaining why the Roethlisberger story is different from the Bryant story. The network has now put itself in the uncomfortable position of having to be unassailably consistent on every other civil suit involving an athlete that comes out in the future, or that happened in the past. And if there is even one example of inconsistent news judgment that doesn’t reflect the same measured response to the Roethlisberger story, ESPN’s credibility is going to become the story.

and Mike Francesa…

“Bottom line is ESPN is extremely protective of athletes, especially the ones that do commercials with them. … ESPN, when they are in bed with athletes, they just protect them. We know that. That’s nothing new.”

…for telling the truth.

————————————–

Ironically, ESPN has begun reporting the allegations against  Roethlisberger (Mike and Mike in the Morning Show).
————————————-

I know I wrote in a comment yesterday that I was preparing an article on Jeremy Mayfield for today but this took precedent. I apologize to anyone expecting that article.