- Joined
- Sep 1, 2010
- Messages
- 30,775
- Reaction score
- 38,038
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.silly. you mean msnbcFox news???
I for one would not be able to control myself. i would be laughing my ass off for years. I absolutely hate hate hate espn with a burning hot passion.Two things NFL* fans everywhere would cheer.
1) The current NFL* Omissioner being fired.
2) ESPN being sued by the Pats.
Yep and bundle ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN right there with them.
Only the Cartoon Network is fair and balanced
well, I find it hard to believe the pats would sue espn, but I did notice 'damage to our brand' about 10x in that e-mail correspondence.
at the very least they were waving the stick
funny how some just can't see how ALL the news is slanted..I guess if you believe everything a certain outlet is preaching, you don't see it as slant. Amusing how some from one political side always sceam Fox news while the news stations they watch do the exact same thing. More interesting is not HOW stories are covered, but WHAT stories are not covered by the so called top news outlets.Yep and bundle ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN right there with them.
Only the Cartoon Network is fair and balanced
"And while NFL schedulers have historically worked to spread marquee matchups among its TV partners, the upcoming MNF schedule is viewed as one pointedly lacking in high-interest games, with multiple sources inside ESPN’s Bristol, Conn., headquarters believing the “terrible” schedule is “pay back for Simmons and Olbermann,” as one source put it."
Actually, I think ESPN has a right to be afraid. I think the John Dennis leak on Friday that Mike Kensil was the source for Mort's story along with the emails released on the Wells Report in Context was a clear shot by Kraft to Goodell and the League that they may have a fairly strong defamation case if they choose to file it. If they do follow through and sue the league, ESPN could be co-defendants.
The guy who gave it to him has 1 NFL related like on Facebook and that is Jetsinsider. This is/was publicly viewable. He took a story from a man who anyone with the click of a mouse would be shown to be a fan of the Patriots rival.Remember the actual malice standard: to prove ESPN committed defamation, the Patriots would likely need to prove that Mortensen already knew (or strongly suspected) that the story was false at the time he sent that tweet.
The guy who gave it to him has 1 NFL related like on Facebook and that is Jetsinsider. This is/was publicly viewable. He took a story from a man who anyone with the click of a mouse would be shown to be a fan of the Patriots rival.
Remember the actual malice standard: to prove ESPN committed defamation, the Patriots would likely need to prove that Mortensen already knew (or strongly suspected) that the story was false at the time he sent that tweet.
If Mortensen/ESPN knew the report was false and didn't retract it, it may be considered malice. News sources have to retract stories all the time. Usually they bury it somewhere. But the Mortensen story has never been retracted.