If you'll forgive me for getting all meta, there are a couple of interesting pieces today about the way rumors fly about the Internet. In both cases, misinformation was spread about fighters, in one case by a traditional newspaper and in the other by a fairly obscure web site. In both cases, it was the online media that cleared things up.

First Zak Woods talks about the Jamie Varner situation:

The first report from Vindy.com made the assertion that Jamie Varner was to be stripped of the WEC lightweight title. This report spread like wildfire as MMA blogs and news websites cited it as a legitimate source and why shouldn't they, newspapers and their websites are suppose to disseminate accurate information so blaming the readers for taking the information at face value is a disingenuous argument. Also the Vindy article contained numerous quotes from the WEC General Manager several of which seemed to imply that Varner's fighting career was permanently over.

Within a few short hours many, if not all, MMA websites, blogs and forums were citing Vindy.com's report. Again the grey-beards of journalism would cite this  as a deficiency of blogs and other Internet information providers, as they failed to corroborate the information. However, major news outlets follow the same pattern. For instance Chris Mortensen reported that Russ Grimm was to be named the new Steelers coach and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette website ran with it until the Steelers denied the story. As we all know, Mike Tomlin, not Grimn, was named the Steelers head coach. Or take for example the New York Times recent report that Sammy Sosa tested positive for steroids. Papers and news organizations around the country ran with the story, without corroborating it in house. The same pattern occurred in this instance.

The triumph of the online MMA community was how fast the initial reports were clarified once the WEC's General Manger and Jamie Varner spoke out. Instantly updates went up across the world wide web as MMA and WEC fans quickly realized that Varner's career was not over and he would remain the champion. In this facet the speed and efficiency of the online delivery of information cannot be doubted nor question and should be viewed as a success.

Then there's the altogether more sordid tale of a fabricated Brock Lesnar interview that appeared online and triggered an avalanche of smack talk from Shane Carwin. Mark Figula at FightTicker breaks down what happened:

One such story was posted on a site by the name of Ground n' Pound in which an entire interview with the Minnesotan giant was apparently fabricated. I read the story late last week, followed by some responsive commentary on Five Ounces of Pain from Shane Carwin. What transpired after that was a little rumor storm not unlike what one might find in their local middle school. Posts on popular fight forums, opening all kinds of discussion; calls from friends asking if I had heard about this "feud" brewing, etc... I myself almost got caught up in the hyperbole, making a post more or less to bring an entertaining topic to light rather than to claim it had any credence. Innocent motive or not, isn't that maybe just how rumors spread even further?

Well, just the same, the world keeps turning and, at the behest of some thoughtful and cool heads, I was soon out on a mission to find out the truth rather than simply regurgitate old info with a touch of Mark word spice. The truth as I now know it is as follows:

1. After a bit of digging, a close friend got a hold of Brock Lesnar's attorney's information for me. I immediately wrote to him and received a response at a surprisingly late hour. I hope the man is getting well paid, working that much. The official statement from Brian C. Stegeman, Esq. is simply: " The quotes that were attributed to Brock Lesnar regarding, among other things, his thoughts on his upcoming bout against Frank Mir at UFC 100 in an article posted on groundnpound.org on June 23, 2009, were entirely fabricated."
2. I spoke with the owner of Ground n' Pound and he commented that the interview with Lesnar appeared while he was away on vacation, the result of his site being hacked. He released an official statement on the site as to the same. The most cynical among us could question if there was a publicity play here. I do recall, however, a hacker getting into our nice cyber home, FightTicker.com, and having a field day with Viagra posts. Hacking is a very real problem and when a hacker has a chance to break into and manipulate a news source the results of the misdeed can have quite a nice - and I mean that in the least pleasant way -- Internet ripple.
3. The last bit of information to follow up on was whether or not the published responses of Shane Carwin on Five Ounces of Pain where possibly fabricated as well. Five Ounces is a pretty reputable site so I was going into this thinking that was unlikely and that Shane probably got bamboozled by the made up interview as well. I wasn't able to get a hold of Shane directly but did speak with one of his trainers, Trevor Wittman, who confirmed that Carwin had indeed responded to what he thought was a legitimate piece.

As much as some hanker for a mythical time in the past when news was handled by scientific specialists, carefully vetted and edited before publication, the reality is that information gathering and dissemination is a haphazard process. Always has been, always will be. Personally, I come down strong on the side of more transparency, more voices, more conversation and more accountability. But hey, I'm a blogger.