Whitlock done all around ESPN

The comments section under the blog is downright hilarious. Especially the person that can't figure out the usage of the word "it's".

 

Major kudos to Whitlock on this one. Most people would not have had the balls to make the comments he made in that blog interview and to write this article. I have newfound respect for Mr. Whitlock.

 

very strong, jason, very strong

 

<<I told the blog that Lupica and Joe Valerio, the producer of "The Sports Reporters," had become disenchanted with me because I would not join in the crusade to portray Barry Bonds as the baseball anti-Christ. I'm not a Bonds fan and don't think all that much of his recent accomplishments. But a life spent competing in sports and writing about sports has made me uninterested in pretending that Bonds is the real villain in the steroids mess. And I have zero tolerance for when people try to censor my ability to state fair opinions.>>

This passage is something that really puzzles me. I mean, if you're running a panelists-type show with much discussion abou the hot topics of the day, wouldn't you welcome a dissenting opinion from one of the panelists, which would ensure heated, maybe even volatile, debate. It sounds to me like the producers just wanted Whitlock to fall in lockstep with their opinion, and I don't think that would make for better TV.

Oh, and I echo the thought: Great column.

 

Ditto. A great read.

 

Whitlock and I have had a spat or two on here, but THAT is how it's done.

Great work.

 

Gotta say, this makes ESPN look very bad.

Also, if you are a reporter and The Big Lead asks you for an interview, just know that you have a twenty-five percent chance of being fired, based on current statistics.

 

Impressive. But I can't quit you, Whitlock! I'll follow you to AOL.

 

What's the over/under on the time Tom Petty will come in here, bash Whitlock and work a fat joke into the post?

I say 11:30 p.m. EST.

 

Under.

 

appreciate the kind words... but i am what i am.