I don't think there's a line at all because that's what reporters are suppose to do if they don't do it themselves someone else will report it and get recognition from it instead

 

Without getting all long winded, I will say that I truly believe they are the root of all evil...I hate the fact that they dig for stories outside of the athletes profession.a lot of them are pieces of sh$#, reporters who have bad intensions, reporters who don't know sh$# about sports..TMZ crossovers...Irresponsible journalism has ruined people, and families lives, because they have no regard for the human being, just the rating of the story...Its disgusting to me, and for those with alterior motives, I wish bad things to happen to.

 

TMZ Sports.

 

I think that's a cop out (not aimed at you personally).

It's like if someone leaves their car door unlocked and I steal everything in the glove compartment. "If I didn't do it, someone else would have." Doesn't make it right.

Reporters are supposed to have some semblance of ethics and common sense.

There are things in this world that aren't anyone else's business.

 

Well, at least Sanchez is starting to date females now.

 

The best example of how sports reporting has changed (in large part to the OJ drama) was watching an interview with an old Yankee reporter explaining how sport reporting has changed (it was about 10 years ago)...

He said he was on a train back in the day having dinner with a fellow reporter when the door to the coach opened up and Babe Ruth ran through butt-naked. Behind him was a woman with a knife screaming "I am going to kill you!" When they went to the next coach the reporter looked at his colleague and said, "Did you just see that?" The colleague said, "No or I would have to report it."

I can't imagine any reporter today not writing about the incident regardless of whether it would ruin the players career or the other persons life. Not only would they report it, then they would try to interview the woman's mother, father, kids, co-workers, etc... and try to get all the dirt they could.

 

All due respect DJ, but it's OUR fault. As a society, not you and me in particular.

If we as a society didn't suborn that kind of reporting with our dollars, they couldn't do it because it would defy the business model. If even just a significant minority of us decided to shun news services which are the worst offenders, then the message would get across and we would see a reduction in that ****.

There's always going to be a sub-element of our culture that buys the Enquirer and The Weekly World News, and publications/services of that sort always have had a niche market; the problem is that over the last 20 years or so, the worst kind of reporting has become the most mainstream.

But don't condemn the reporters, nor even the services themselves - condemn those who want that sort of thing, along with those of us who don't do anything about it.

Exactly.

 

Funny how people act like there was never sensational media
or yellow journalism.

 

Everything IS fair game when you're a professional athlete. A reporter wouldn't be allowed to follow me around and find out who im (trying) to have sex with, but when you step onto the field as an Nfl Player or coach, you become a public figure.

And when you become a public figure, you accept that everything you do, whether it be banging a 17 year old or creating internet videos of your wifes feet, can and probably WILL become public knowledge.

These guys make millions to play/coach a game, they can handle the extra attention.

Also, reporting is completely based on circulation/viewership etc. Journalists don't bother reporting what nobody cares about, so don't blame the news outlets, blame everyone else for being interested.

 

Exactly.

McDonalds didn't get to be the biggest fast food chain and remain there because nobody likes
to eat there. Funny, but almost nobody you ask will say that they like McDonalds, but they
remain tops in sales. Wonder why that is.

Billy Ray Cyrus went gajillion platinum with Achey Breaky heart, as did Vanilla Ice with Ice Ice baby.

Funny...Now it appears nobody really liked either of them, and certainly didn't like Grammy award
winning Milli Vanilli.

We're such a bunch of hyprocrites as a society. We act disgusted that the press is reporting
..... or ANYONE is reporting on Brett Farve's *****, Sanchez banging a legal age girl, etc, but
we're not really horrified. We love it, and we prove it with our readership and patronage.

 

As long as the player is still active then it has cause for being covered by the sports media. Its the coverage former players get once they retire that I wish would end. I'm not talking about a where are they now piece or obituary, I mean the criminal behavior that they find themselves involved in. Once you retire your actions have little impact on sports organizations and the sports media should cease covering these stories. Lawrence Taylor is just another alleged criminal, his story does not need to be followed by ESPN or be found in the sports pages of your newspaper. That's my two bit gripe.

 

While this is all true, keep in mind the general public is partially to blame as well. TMZ wouldn't exist if there wasnt a "market" for the filth they provide. Some people want to know, and love to know all this crap. It's driving "ratings" and attention lately, apparently its what people want, it creates big headlines and controversy, that fuels itself as people continue to talk about it. Sure the reporters are out there digging it up, and throwing it all out there, but you got to know theyre doing it as well because people are buying it, watching it, reading it and talking about it.

Its become a really messy situation all the way around though. It's crossed the line at following people around and digging into their personal lives IMO. It's ok to sit with them in an interview and ask them questions about their personal life because there's obviously some sort of agreement to that person giving out the information, but to start following them, digging through garbage and stuff to find information, then speculate and run with it, has just gotten ridiculous. I actually feel bad for celebrities. Hell, theyve got people following camera's with them everywhere they go. There's websites you can go to to see pics of where these people go on a daily basis, getting in and out of their cars, getting a coffee, eating a sandwich, going to a doctor, on and on and on. I can't imagine living like that way.

 

I'm not following you here.

Why would a 'public figure' have less rights/legal protections than the average citizen?

I don't think everything is fair game. It's 'fair' game in the eyes of everyone except party(s) being violated. It's just that the machine is so big there's very little you can do about it.

It all comes down to free will and the rights of others. If a paparazzo with exploitative intentions wants to park their *** on the sidewalk in front of your house, they can. It's not 'right', but it's legal.

I'm probably old fashioned.

 

Cue: Bodyguards.

 

I thought that's WHY they reported those wack stories, precisely because they have some semblance of ethics and common sense.

 

The line is drawn where people will stop reading.

If people want to read stories about Sanchez and a 17 year old high school girl, then I see no reason someone shouldn't report it.

 

once you become a public figure, you DO have less rights than a normal citizen. For instance, when South park had the episode about Tom Cruise being in the closet. Tom Cruise was pissed, but he couldnt sue because he's a public figure. In order for a public figure to sue for invasion of privacy/slander/libel, they have to prove both actual malice and false information.

it was established in a court case in the 80s when Hustler magazine ran a fake advertisement poking fun at Jerry Falwell maybe sleeping with his mother. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell Since then Public Figures have had to prove that paparazzi or other news out lets have literally destroyed their entire lives with their articles. Meaning they lost their movie deals, playing contracts, coaching contracts, wife/husbands divorced them, etc. And since nothing that extreme ever happens over a few newspapers being too nosy, they're basically not protected the same as us 'normals'

Now if South Park were to run an episode saying John Doe is still in the closet, John Doe could sue them easily. Tom Cruise or Mark Sanchez? no way.

 

It goes both ways. Why exactly do sports athletes get invited to Jay Leno or David Letterman? They're not comedians or actors. The things they say don't entertain us (or that's not what they do for a living anyway). Some of them even host saturday night live on occasion. These guys go to movie premiers, hollywood parties, etc. They make themselves celebrities and thus they're treated that way.

How many women do you think live in New York that know exactly who Alex Rodriguez is and have absolutely no idea what team he plays for?

 

lot of temptation out there.
never judge a man until you've walked in his shoes.
besides, what does this have to do with football?

:couch:​

discretion is difficult with reporters draped over you.
next time you read something like this ask yourself:

what's in my closet?
because the line is usually drawn @ your closet door

think about it​

 

not so tough. you go to a bakery to buy bread not shoes. just a matter of what you're shopping for...
I bet both Oprah & Jerry Springer have internet sites & respective forums to post, if you like that kind of thing.

 

you can talk ethics all you want ... but at the end of the day - it's about sensationalism and selling a product, whether that be in print or TV. I don't agree with it, but tabloid journalism is not going to go away -- it sells too well with the public for some god foresaken reason.

if folks are ignorant enough to idolise 'celebrities' ... then there is an unwritten expectation that comes along with that - whether you like it or not. if you don't like it, then don't get into the sports, entertainment or public service industries.