Following up on Rome's thoughtful post, I wanted to just add a few thoughts. First, comparisons to boxing in terms of journalists like Bert Sugar or Carlos Arias being something similar to Meltzer hyping a UFC fight are off. To put it bluntly, there are structural problems for the sport. Hyping up the only game in town is not the same as discussing events created by different promoters. Sugar can talk up Top Rank's events as well or as often as Golden Boy's. While there is still some issue of candor and truthfulness from what experts like Sugar say no matter the sport's structure, that is very different than explaining why the top and only dog is putting on meaningful fights...with in-house production. There is at least some separation in boxing between the promoting organization, television outlet and the journalist. Were the UFC to have even one or two competitors and allow these journalists to hype those competitors fights, the matter would be different. But I have serious doubts the UFC would ask Meltzer to discuss fights for them were he also in the services of EliteXC and Affliction in a world where those two organizations actually had some serious footing in the sport. I do not know Dana White, but I find it difficult to square his loyalty-driven "you're either with us or against us" attitude with objective journalists giving a more nuanced view of the sport.

Second, I have long expressed reservations about the relationship between Yahoo and the UFC. From your's truly:

I don't place Yahoo! in the same category as some of the awful writers at the Newark Star-Ledger, but what I would say is that the marriage between Yahoo! and the UFC is a little too close for comfort. You can make an argument that any mainstream newspaper's corporate overlords can wield the same kind of influence, but really the relationships are dramatically different. Aside from the place in society that the media holds as the Third Estate, the UFC and Yahoo! are partners but also separate entities. They work together for mutual benefit, so it goes without saying that both have incentive to keep the other satisfied as a partner under the terms laid out in their contractual agreement. To think that Dana White would even hesitate finding a way out of a partnership with Yahoo! were they to offer fair but consistent criticism of the UFC is fantasy. He'll bend a little because he has to, but he is partnering with them (beyond the fact that they have a tremendous online reach) because he already views it as a friendly platform and because he expects to see favorable coverage.

The UFC puts new articles on the front page of their website everyday that present what they do and what they're about in a positive light. Obviously you wouldn't expect the to put negative articles, but that's not the point. Part of what they are doing is driving the narrative of events and ideas in their favor. They are cultivating use of the term "ultimate fighting" and spreading pre-packaged talking points as incontrovertible truths so reporters in turn disseminate them. The UFC has been searching and hunting for credibility for years, so I sympathize with this position in part. But they are also deeply resentful of any criticism whether it's correct or helpful or worthless. They are incessantly trying to dictate the terms of any debate. This new entanglement with Yahoo! isn't evidence of nefarious aims, but it worries me just the same. It seems to me to be a business move first and foremost, and as a secondary benefit, back-end influence over the power and reach of one of the Internet's largest news sources.

Since writing this piece, I will commend Yahoo for doing a credible job. But the objection still stands: in an era where a business arrangement has to be upheld by partners, the idea that one can effectively and fairly report on the other causes me to raise an eyebrow.

Third, I have a few irons in the fire myself. Among my gigs at Sports Blog Nation, CBS Radio, MixedMartialArts.com, Sherdog.com and Ultimate Warrior Challenge people must question whatever I say when I opine about them. I have a vested interest in them and I want to make that clear to everyone. I can promise you that I will never lie about my feelings towards those organizations, but it's incumbent upon others to decide how objective or accurate any analysis is that I provide on those topics. Choosing to work with those organizations compromises my overall ability to be conflict of interest-free, but I made the choice to trade some level of independence for a greater ability to be heard. That's my decision and I have to live with it.

Lastly, the UFC's complaints about the negativity or errancy of blogs is little more than crocodile tears. While not all blogs are created equal and some of the negativity is outrageous, the vacuum in the reporting and analysis market in MMA has enabled intrepid writers of considerable ability to cover the sport without big media backing. Many of those who have taken up the charge of covering the sport in such fashion are better writers with a far better knowledge base delivering a far more compelling product than the majority of reporters and writers in big media who've come to write about the sport in the last few months and years. But unlike those with big media on the letterheard, the independent writers are shunned from the UFC. They have no formal or even informal relationship with the organization. Therefore, the blogs are either forced to find information on their own or rely on others to do reporting. But that's not the major problem. The more central issue is that the UFC has chosen to have absolutely no dialogue with any new media. They have taken it upon themselves to not even try to engage the blogosphere, share their perspective directly and give some of the more established, informed bloggers the opportunity to get a better sense of the organization, its mission, players, objectives and most importantly, worldview. What they are treated to is constant insults, derision and dismissal. But MMA blogs and the MMA blogosphere grows by the day. Their influence is not waning. If the UFC chooses to not engage them and in fact insults them, then they cannot subsequently complain about much of the negative coverage. In effect, they are choosing to make that trade off. If they are happy with that arrangement, so be it.