UFC "Indefinitely" Yanks Sherdog.com's Media Credentials
by Luke Thomas on Mar 22, 2010 7:23 PM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
I am curious to hear what explanation Zuffa offers this time. Josh Gross breaks the story:
Two hours before doors opened Sunday at the 1stBank Center in Broomfield, Colo., a UFC official informed Sherdog.com -- the largest independent MMA media site on the Web, the official MMA content partner for ESPN.com, and my home as an executive editor from 2004-2008 -- that its access had been pulled indefinitely because of a "executive decision," multiple sources confirmed to SI.com.
Asked to comment on the decision to revoke Sherdog.com's access, UFC president Dana Whitetold SI.com via text that his reasoning was "none of your [expletive] business."
Darius Ortiz, the editor in charge of boxing and mixed martial arts for ESPN.com, and Sherdog.com founder Jeff Sherwood declined to comment on the UFC's position.
Sherdog.com went without access to the UFC from late 2005 until the middle of 2009, when it was allowed to return Octagon-side.
I've tried to talk to folks close to the situation about the cause of the credential removal. Either people are tight-lipped or they simply do not know.
Either way it hardly matters. And frankly, the more I learn about what's required to obtain and keep UFC credentialing (both publicly and behind the scenes) in the print and digital media space, the less I care to try at this point. It's an intractable situation. Either competent journalists are allowed to report in a manner as objective, exhaustive and explanatory as possible or they are not. And if you think Sherdog.com is incompetently run, I'm afraid you know nothing about media.
The reality is the UFC is not interested in courting a fully competent and capable press. Admittedly, there are many good journalists and more generally, good people who the UFC credentials. There are also many good people who work in Zuffa's PR offices. I do not chide them for trying to look after themselves, their families and their careers. But unquestionably, they are neutered. There is limited universe as to what reporters can ask or report. I have had several conversations with many of the folks who the UFC credentials today who have told me as much. I am not putting words in anyone's mouth nor am I assuming anything out of thin air. This is a real living and breathing concern, albeit one shared to varying degrees.
The fact is it is hard to make the case the UFC takes the complete exercise of journalism seriously. As we know, White sees the role of the media as a de facto PR arm for the promotion of MMA or more likely, the UFC itself. They also openly credential the incompetent. Others may have no problem with it, but I take issue with being part of a Senate where my contemporary is a horse.
Within the MMA space, one has to tread lightly to keep credentials. And outside of the traditional MMA sphere, yes, the UFC is courting legitimate journalists at legitimate institutions. About that there can be no debate. But they are doing so to reach a different audience. They are trying to capture the not-so-savvy-potential-MMA-fan. It's actually a very smart corporate strategy: get folks at traditional papers to write about you to widen the scope of the UFC to the mainstream audience. I actually applaud them for that. The problem? No one ever asks the tough questions in those circumstances either because they don't care to or they don't know how. It's a clever way of keeping all of the discussion on high-level message points at the surface level. It's also a bulwark for the veterans willing to ask questions or pursue stories that come from time spent on the job while keeping close the uninitiated and impressionable.
It's perfectly reasonable to have issues with the coverage featured on Sherdog.com, but I've yet to find anyone who can point to systemic problems that indict the entire operation. And that is sort of key to the issue of credentialing. Veteran reporters across the sports reporting landscape have told me time and again that their job is to fully and fairly report on matters as they see it without worrying if the league is going to have subsequent issues with the coverage. None of them have argued that the UFC doesn't have the right to credential as they see fit, but none seem to understand the wisdom in their present approach.
It's the UFC's world. They can credential who they please. No one can say otherwise. But the costs of admission are candor, completeness and fairness, and not solely at the margins. That's a steep price to pay. Guess who foots the bill?
303 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What led to Sherdog getting “re-credentialed” last year?
What concession or stipulation does Dana want from Sherdog?
Being overrated is overrated.
They want posters in their boards to stop saying that BJ Penn vs. Brock Lesnar would go the distance and that Penn would win by decision.
by hellig on Mar 22, 2010 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
THE REAL REASON SHERDOG'S CREDENTIALS WERE REVOKED...
probably has to do with Jeff Sherwood’s interview, where he’s trashing Dana White in a excerpt from Fighting Politics: The Story of Matt Lindland documentary. Click on the link below posted on Bloody Elbow.
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2010/3/19/1381552/fighting-politics-the-story-of#32912354
[Video has since been removed, but the poster frame is still there]
I can’t remember word for word what Jeff Sherwood said, but I do remember him trashing saying some things about Dana White.
However, I find it funny that Jeff Sherwood’s clip has been removed from the youtube [poster frame still visible though]. Why? Couldn’t Sherwood stand behind the things he was saying about Dana & the UFC?
Why is sherdog.com pretending they don’t know what went on. Their founder trashed Dana White, and the UFC probably revoked their press credentials in retaliation. But what looks fishy is the fact that Sherwood’s interview has been pulled taken down from Youtube.
Are Sherdog scared of possible of legal action at what Jeff said? I don’t know, but Sherdog.com probably know more than they are letting on.
by higgledy-piggledy on Mar 23, 2010 5:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Sherdog did not post the videos on youtube. Really think you’re trying to pull something out of nowhere with that angle.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 23, 2010 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions
I think he’s reaching but he has a point. If you make comments, stand by them. As a writer on this site, if you make a mistake you own up to it and allow for discussion about why you are wrong. While I don’t think that the aluminum hat theory this guy is pushing is true, you cannot deny that Loretta and Josh have been very outspoken about negative things that Zuffa does.
And I’m pretty sure that Josh’s text wasn’t just “hey dana, why’d you revoke their credentials?” And it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal to report on Sports Illustrated. I’m taking this as Gross just being Gross and still eating those sour grapes of his.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s not a point though. He’s claiming that Sherdog pulled these videos because they’re possibly scared of legal action.
Those videos are not owned, nor were they posted by Sherdog. Nor is there any legal action that they’re at any risk of.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 23, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Out of all the videos only Sherwood’s was pulled. At the beginning of Loretta’s spot she pretty much acknowledges that she’s going to say something that cross the line from journalistic integrity to straight up pettiness.
My point in this is that you can’t be consistently petty and then cry pettiness when the company you constantly bad mouth revokes your credentials.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
I think you are reading too much into it - I never said Sherdog posted the clips...
But what I did say was that I found it funny that Jeff’s Sherwood’s clip had been removed.
As “thisredengine” states, “Out of all the videos only Sherwood’s was pulled”. I’m not reaching, I’m stating something that is obvious.
Do us a favour and ask Jeff Sherwood why his interview was taken down?
The video was taken down shortly after it when posted on here and uploaded to youtube.
There may not be a legal ramifications b/c of the interview, but is it a coincidence sherdog didn’t get media credentials after Jeff’s comments appeared on youtube?
"I'm Nobody's FanBoy" - higgledy-piggledy
by higgledy-piggledy on Mar 29, 2010 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions
100% speculation
http://www.fightofthenight.com/news/sherdog-com-has-its-ufc-credentials-pulled/
“So what is the reason for the latest falling out?
While their is no official word at this time my guess would be that it relates to a new DVD release by former UFC fighter Matt Lindland titled ‘Fighting Politics.’
The film was officially released this month, and in amongst a host of other interviews several current or former staff at Sherdog, namely Jeff Sherwood, Loretta Hunt, and Josh Gross, make some less than glowing remarks about the UFC president Dana White."
by bawzz on Mar 22, 2010 7:31 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Journalists that allow personal feelings into the mix so much so that they’re launching petty insults? Sorry, Luke, but in the context of journalism, that is incompetence.
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions
What?
You need to explain.
They were asked about dana white for a documentary and gave their feelings and it’s incompetent?
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah i think so
They’re supposed to be journalists right? Why should they be taken seriously if they’re just gonna stoop to dana’s slim ball standards?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards
I find them to be severely lacking in any sort of journalistic integrity and thus have no particular problem with this.
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I got my B.S. at Wikipedia university
How did I end up on this bandwagon and why does everything say property of Chael Sonnen?
Don’t knock the wiki man! it’s an awesome tool.
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions
So…if a boxing writer were to say something negative about Don King or Bob Arum being crooks and criminals…then…they’re not real journalists right?
Or when MLB media make fun of the inept Bud Selig…what does that mean?
I’ve not seen the clips in question. but unless it’s extraordinarily over the top i have trouble accepting this as an excuse.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
The other thing I would add that if these were comments in the context of a documentary then the ethics of journalism don’t even apply necessarily. I’ve worked on several docs over the course of my career as a video editor and the majority of them are more akin to feature length editorials then actual reporting.
definitely
this is outside of the scope of their journalistic duties… I’m a little fed up with this bogus notion that people that do journalism have to be these “objective” drones. Journalists are people, as much as we like to pretend that they don’t have views and opinions. If its obviously effecting their work then yes, of course its a problem… , DW has a small penis.
Eh, journalism is an area of particular interest for me so that’s why i’m gonna tend to have pretty strong opinions here, and while i haven’t seen the clips either, they’re hardly the only source of my ire for Sherdog. I probably am letting these other issues influence me and get me out of line a little i suppose.
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I think your glossing over the strength of sherdogs statements on this.
when a media outlet has the majority of its staff, writers or editors, participate in an obviously biased and slanted take on past events I think it would be proper to question whether that organization can still be called a credible media outlet.
I would not be surprised if ESPN started looking for another affiliation.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 22, 2010 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Because ESPN has been a bastion of objective reporting cough first Roethlisberger scandal cough
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
It goes both ways. DW slobbered all over a youtube video that Loretta Hunt was an “f*cken b*tch” ad nauseum like a drunken frat boy. Everybody has a bias, even reporters. If you’re participating in a “behind the scenes look” at the industry and asking for peoples “take” on that situation… what do you expect, an equal amount of nouns and verbs attributed to each side?
you should watch the clips, they are bias, and that’s NOT journalism.
by cagefightonacid on Mar 22, 2010 10:55 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Participating as a subject in a documentary film is not part a journalistic endeavor to begin with.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
When your company is stated in the beginning, you become a representative of your company. If it’s Jeff Sherwood – Photographer, okay fine, you technically are an outsider just giving an opinion. When you are Jeff Sherwood – Founder of Sherdog, you are a representative of said company. And as such, if you make a comment, you stand by it.
Nate does this all the time. He makes a post which many people disagree with, but he stands by it and discusses it. It seems that Sherdog does not want to explain their end when they have a long history of taking business matters to the personal realm.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree that a documentary is different then a news report and they have every right to spout off about any issue they want as long as they recognize there may be repercussions.
They weren’t there as individuals though, they all were identified and identified them selves as members of Sherdog. This means the “News Organization” that is Sherdog was in full participation in this very biased documentary. Not journalism, it’s propaganda.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 23, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
I know in my job if I talked negatively about my customer in public and that customer got mad at my company about it and wanted to end their business relationship would be out on my arse in a hurry. Things are a little different having the boss saying negative things but it is even more reason for the UFC to take action on the company as a whole if the boss wants to go on record and say negative things about the boss of the company that he wants to cover as a journalist.
Every journalst tha wants to come out and print a story about someone that is in a position of power to effect the company that hires them is taking a risk. Some take action some don’t depending on the circumstances and what allegations are presented but it is always a risk to the journalist and even the editor when it comes to printing the story.
See, my take after seeing those interviews is that they left journalistic integrity behind and brought up personal matters. Josh Gross since getting a lifetime ban has not exactly given fair and unbiassed opinion of Zuffa’s inner workings. Jeff Sherwood has also been pretty vocal about things.
If they do it and don’t receive any sort of backlash from other media, then you can’t get on Dana for doing the same thing. I enjoy Jordan Breen but I would never call him a journalist. And I think that Gross and Hunt are part of the old guard that just kind of get lumped in because of legacy. I’m unimpressed by them and think that the new school of writers such as Ariel, Chiapetta, and Snowden do a better job reporting the news.
You take Colfield and Iole with a grain of salt but both receive scoops and at least report on other organizations for yahoo without completely badmouthing them. You can’t say the same about Sherdog/Sports Illustrated.
This site is very good at reporting and sparking discussion but I also take what I read here with a grain of salt because I understand that one person on staff takes a point and posts and article and then another staff member takes the opposite side and posts a counter article.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 22, 2010 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
to wit
You don’t see guys like Ariel, etc. going after Dana White. You see them reporting on things as best they can. The guys involved in this video have to put the blame on themselves and take responsibility for saying things that jeopardize their status, for good or bad.
On my end, I couldn’t find Sherwoods comments but I didn’t think Gross or Hunt said anything out of line. It was just the same crying game about Lindland, which nobody even cares about. It seems like a very silly reason for them to lose credentials, if this IS the reason.
by Chris Barton on Mar 23, 2010 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions
keep in mind that Ariel Helwani
good as he is works for Versus and would have a very complicated situation were he to become critical of Zuffa. Ariel does excellent work, but he’s not in a position to be a true objective critic of the UFC.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
You don’t need to be overly critical to get your point across though. That’s what makes him different from Josh Gross. He still gives his opinion, he just doesn’t constantly attack. He’s had the same reporting style since he was running his own website and still gave his opinion. Is it slanted? Maybe, that’s arguable. But even guys like Iole who is a known shill still report about Strikeforce and Dream without showing company bias.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Really? Dana White is quoted about Strikeforce events more often than Scott Coker on some websites I won’t mention.
by Jonathan Snowden on Mar 23, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Not broadcast partner is overly critical of it's sport
Do you think Jim Nance is going to ask Tiger about the perkins pancake chick in an interview? CBS won’t even mention the Item. The pressure in that situation in different, and in no way limited to the UFC.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 23, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
6 fish chuck
I like that point. Sportcasters and journalists are a little different by trade, but, I agree with the point.
If Russia attacked Turkey from the rear, Do you think Greece would help?
You’re absolutely correct, but that hasn’t stopped him from turning into the best reporter the sport has. Right or wrong it’s the way the sports world works. Like I said, the comments I saw weren’t very negative… maybe you could construe Gross as being bad, but I thought he was more fair than usual.
I’m not beating some drum of “journalistic integrity” because, well I think the idea is silly. I just think that if you’re gonna play the game you need to prepare for the backlash of your actions and not flip out (to their credit, they don’t seem to be…. we are on here more than anything).
by Chris Barton on Mar 23, 2010 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I couldn't agree with you more
I’m tired of hearing MMA Journalists’ personal ‘beef’ with DW. They need to report on the NEWS of MMA and quit writing about BS.
Sherwood’s interview has since been removed, I wonder why? Did he get spooked and ask the producers to take his interview down? Who knows.
by higgledy-piggledy on Mar 23, 2010 5:49 AM EDT up reply actions
This is ridiculous
You dont like me so I’m not going to invite you to any more of my parties. This just makes Zuffa look childish. Unfortunately the vast majority of UFC fans wont even batter an eyelid. Hopefully MMA fans will demand answers from Dana. Hes like a nerd whos got popular and is seeking revenge….
Holy snapping duck shit...
lol at a bunch of net nerds demanding answers from the bald father.
by MMAGuard on Mar 22, 2010 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Is it really different than anyone else?
Look at the mainstream media and Tiger Woods. He could do no wrong and was portrayed as an amazing athlete, intelligent man, passionate, and genuine. Then this scandal breaks and what do we find out? Tiger’s first interview where he won the hearts of fans was actually a media campaign by Nike and his first commercial was aired the next day with the exact same words he used. Tiger controlled all media around him. If you said something negative about him and he would refuse to answer your questions or give you interviews…essentially killing a golf reporters career.
So is the UFC acting any different than other sports or sports figures? And are the “journalists” who keep their credentials for the UFC acting any different than mainstream and golf media does when they cover other sports?
And his return tournament will be 100% protected. If you ask a question that he doesn’t want to answer you risk getting your credentials removed forever. Not just for that year, but forever. Augusta National is notorious for this.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know if that would be the cause. That was filmed a long time ago, and snippets of it were making the rounds before they got their credentials back the last time.
It’s not like Dana would have to work hard at finding something on Sherdog to piss him off. He’s really really touchy(and an ass) and they can be obnoxious and sensationalistic, they are going to clash. Not to mention they have a long history of not liking each other. This isn’t really that surprising, heck it’s surprising this lasted as long as it did.
This
This is very old news – seems strange that the DVD release would cause all of this hoopla.
by E_liminatorjr on Mar 25, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
i love dana, but if this is true, it's another example how petty he can get..
however, i also feel the sherdog writers didn’t have their common sense hat on when they participated in the documentary (by lindland you say)
at this point in time, lindland is irrelevant to the ufc, he has been out of the ufc for a long time, and he will never fight for them again, so my question is: why make disparaging remarks in an irrelavant dvd, when you can be continously credentialed and participate in the actual coverage of mma events that are historical and relevant?
you should choose and fight battles that you can win
that’s fine but how recently did the Sherdog writers/editors participate in said documentary? If they were being black-balled at the time then why shouldn’t they say whatever they wanted?
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Because you can’t cry pettiness when you’re just as petty.
Chances are this isn’t the reason but seriously it just seems like it’s okay for the media to show a certain bias but never have to answer for it. Gross has been the pettiest of all and he’s still invited on radio shows and given the credit of a great journalist when in reality he’s living off the name he created back 2004 and hasn’t changed his stance with the time. You can only say things so many times before you talk yourself out of relevancy. In my opinion he’s about 3 years past due.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Again…
Participating in a documentary is not a part of anyone’s journalistic duties.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 23, 2010 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions
I said this in response to Mike but I’ll repeat it. When you are Jeff Sherwood – Photographer, you have some leeway and can say you are an outsider. When you are Jeff Sherwood – Founder of Sherdog.com, you are a representative of your company and as such your opinions reflect that of your company. If you are going to make judgements, stand buy them. Don’t throw your hands in the air and claim victim.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
I’ve got so many things I wish I could say that would possibly alter the way certain people in this discussion would see things…but…alas, I can’t say them.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 23, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions
I understand
I’m trying to stay as neutral as possible on this and just playing devil’s advocate to this piece. In reality, it’s a private company that can do anything it wants. If they feel that a 2+ year old documentary is reason then they can do that. But I think that there is more to the story than just Gross writing a simple text “Why’d you take away Sherwood’s credentials” and Dana responding “None of your fucking business”.
I come here because you (the staff) are intelligent and participate in discussions and defend your points. But I also understand that you are still writers for SB nation and cannot fly off the handle calling us retards and morons.
Either way I’m enjoying this discussion with you.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
When you identify yourself as representing an organization in that documentary
It reflects on that organization.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 23, 2010 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
christ, we're saying the same thing.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Hadn't seen your post when I made mine.
Just commenting on the same Item.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 23, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh I'm not angry
I’m actually kind of happy that someone sees my point of view.
Until there is more to the story released, all we have is speculation and I don’t find anything wrong with pulling credentials from a website who has a history of not giving the most balanced opinion.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
My favorite part is when he says “their (sic) is no official word.”
When a journalist doesn’t know the difference between their/there/they’re, that’s how you know you’re receiving high-level journalism.
Also, this movie debuted like 2.5 years ago at film fests. There is nothing coming out now Dana/UFC/Zuffa hasn’t known about for a long time. You guys who are trying to attribute the ban to that are way off base, IMHO, but I don’t have information to the contrary.
Although detractors decry (MMA) as a brutal, bloody form of human cockfighting, aficionados know it is a brutal, bloody, totally fucking awesome form of human cockfighting. -The Onion
by The Kittitas Kid on Mar 23, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
They got re-credentialed back when UFC was trying to hammer out a deal with ESPN after UFC 100. It’s been a matter of time since that deal fell apart.
by Michael Rome on Mar 22, 2010 7:34 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I think the re-credentialing...
Might have had something to do with Dana’s on-camera diatribe against Loretta Hunt and his subsequent retraction of his remarks. As his remarks might have been construed as libellous – and with irrefutable evidence of his remarks – Sherdog might have used their legal position as leverage to get re-credentialed.
One question no-one seems to have posited: would ESPN still have needed Sherdog.com as a content partner if they had inked a deal with the UFC? They have enough of their own journalists on staff that all their MMA reporting could have been done in-house.
by VikingPhotography on Mar 22, 2010 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
ESPN probably would’ve hired all of Sherdog’s writers. They’ve been poaching talent from everyone else and if you really think about it. They are the only ones who could be purchased.
watchkalibrun.com
I doubt they would of hired all the Sherdog staff but I’m sure ESPN would of had no problem putting together a reporting staff of their own from different sources including Sherdog.
ESPN currently uses
Jake Rossen, Franklin McNeil and occasionally other sources such as Neil Davidson of The Canadian Press for leader articles on MMA. Of those three, only Rossen has connections to Sherdog but technically he’s an independent as he also is the editor of Real Fighter magazine.
Whilst it is true that the MMA section of ESPN boasts “in association with Sherdog”, the partnership is much more akin to news syndication i.e. they run selective content from Sherdog.
I do not know anything regarding the financial backbone to the partnership but would hazard a guess that it’s not a million miles away from the traditional news syndication model.
by VikingPhotography on Mar 22, 2010 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Aw
I’d like to live in a world where Caligula references need no explanation.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
I don’t really miss Edith too much.
New Orleans Saints - 2010 Super Bowl Champions. Unbelievable. Who Dat.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Mar 22, 2010 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
I do, my standards aren’t so high that I wouldn’t put a Canadian flag over her face and do her for my country. :)
I play the national anthem to get ready to have sex with my wife.
Stand at attention and all that good stuff.
by Worldisart on Mar 22, 2010 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Does it make us nerds if we got the Caligula reference without having to click the link? Not that there’s anything wrong with nerds… I’m the first to proudly display my badge of nerd-dom.
Sure it does, but...
A real nerd would have known the horse’s name without clicking…
New Orleans Saints - 2010 Super Bowl Champions. Unbelievable. Who Dat.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Mar 22, 2010 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Dana White is a fucking retard if he thinks he only makes good decisions and is above criticism.
I love the “mafia” culture surrounding MMA. Alienating anyone with a dissenting opinion, especially if they’re writers for ESPN, is going to make sure the sport hits a plateau.
ESPN still has coverage of last nights card posted. doesn’t seem to be an issue
Goldie: "Michael Jordan-esque in his grappling skills is Travis Lutter."
Rogan: "No, no he's not. No."
Dana White is not a retard. Seriously, ease up on the language. You can make a criticism of him or his organizations policies without calling him needless names.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Mar 22, 2010 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
I said he’s a fucking retard “if” he thinks he has a spotless decision-making record.
Blacklisting major publications from covering his events is only going to tarnish his already mafia-like reputation and ensure that MMA hits a plateau.
Are you being dumb on purpose? As things rise in prominence so do dissenting opinions of those things. If every organization that has a dissenting opinion is blacklisted the UFC is going to lose credibility as a respectable institution. They’re already getting precious little coverage by ESPN without totally fucking over a well-established content provider.
If you’re happy with these types of classless tactics then don’t let me rain on your parade. I just expect a lot more from the biggest organization of my favorite sport.
it’s called sarcasm, this has happened before in the uFC, and other sports, and it will happen again.
If you’re going to make a list of zuffa’s sins, this probably wouldn’t even break the top half.
Would it be nice if Sherdog was credentialed? yes. Them not being credentialed does not make Dana hitler or this the end of the world. When we wake up, the earth will still be spinning on it’s axis.
The UFC are allowed to take away credentials to anyone they so chose. I think this is very close to what Augusta does with The Masters tournament. I would like to have been a fly on the wall to find out what really happened. In the end, it really doesn’t matter. UFC will continue and so will Sherdog.
If Russia attacked Turkey from the rear, Do you think Greece would help?
The mafia references make me laugh as do your zany over the top statements.
You do know that while Sherdog is a content partner with ESPN they aren’t ESPN employees or considered a “major publication”? It’s bad of White but outside of our internet MMA fan sphere this probably won’t have much of an impact at all. Hell even most of the people who read Sherdog articles probably won’t notice much of a difference in their coverage of the sport.
by who me on Mar 22, 2010 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I remember thinking/saying that Rampage going on a rampage could really tarnish the sport but it survived that just fine, by comparison this isn’t much of a story at all. There is a deeper issue here which may cause problems or may just one day be grown out of(if mainstream coverage ever seriously wants the access then they will get the access)but the actual story of Sherdog losing their credentials yet again won’t generate much of a buzz.
Of course I know they’re merely a content provider, but they’re also a well-established staple of MMA journalism. This incident speaks volumed about the type of man Dana White is and the classless way he’s ushering MMA into the limelight. His lack of proper business etiquette and mafia-like tactics of blacklisting and strongarming are almost certainly going to ensure that MMA plateaus under his leadership.
So they are going to plateau the same as the did the last time White pulled Sherdog’s credentials? You do realize that this is nothing new right? White and Sherdog have been doing this dance for several years now and the sport has seen unprecedented growth in that time frame. Heck Sherdog did it’s best work without the credentials anyway. It’s not like they even had them back that long to begin with. ESPN didn’t give a crap that Sherdog and Zuffa were feuding over credentials in 2007 when they added Sherdog as a content partner why should they care now?
While the statement is somewhat ignorant, I have to give you props for spelling retard correctly. Nothing beats teh use of the word, only to have the user spell it wrong!
by ultimatefightsource on Mar 23, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
We need an eplanation..
If Dana had a good reason for this he needs to come out with it. Otherwise we have to assume its just Zuffa trying to control the press. Sherdog needs to come out with the reason as well ( if they have any idea ). They should just call Dana out for what he is.
Holy snapping duck shit...
Thanks a lot Kid Nate.
Keep firing Assholes!
Blackout is always right
by Ubernoober on Mar 22, 2010 7:36 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Yeah no shit.
Kid Nate voted no on health care reform.
by Brandon Starr on Mar 22, 2010 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions
As soon as I saw the clips with Hunt and Sherwood, for the doc, I figured there would be fallout.
No big shock. I can understand folks criticizing Zuffa for it, but Sherwood and co can’t act surprised by this.
Should Dana and co be above this? Probably, but then did Hunt and Sherwood really need to take part in the doc for the sole purpose of taking shots at Dana?
Let us not pretend that either side is behaving professionally.
The documentary was finished awhile back, but yea, agreed on all accounts.
While I’d say there’s nothing about the content on Sherdog to indict their organization, they’ve been VERY consistent in getting underneath Dana’s skin: Gross spoiling the TUF 4 results (can anyone rationally defend this?) along with his unintentionally hilarious “open letter”, Jake Rossen mocking Dana’s ambitions for the sport, the Loretta Hunt debacle, and so forth.
And now the documentary. The irony about Fighting Politics is that Matt Lindland, hailed in the film as a potential champ, is coming off embarrassing losses to Belfort and Jacare. Even in retrospect, this was a man whose best wins were Phil Baroni at a time when Baroni was kind of a big deal but still a one dimensional brawler.
On a certain level, it’s understandable that Dana would do this, and perhaps even justified, but the bigger issue about transparency remains.
On a personal level, it’s Sherdog, and I don’t much care for their content. Guys like Rossen and Rios, who can be very good writers, sometimes get stuck playing to the rabble rouser role they’ve been assigned to, and ultimately, the only contributors who don’t seem like jaded, cynical lameducks are Jordan Breen and Tony L.
by David Castillo on Mar 22, 2010 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions
To add:
Lindland had 2 shots at the UFC title and lost. Their entire argument is retarded. This is supposed to be responsible “media”?
They dont mention the fact that Lindland was paid 6 figures to wear that T-shirt so he didnt give a shit if he was cut and he didnt give a shit if it caused a shit storm for Zuffa and the venue.
These fucking morons are “media” we need to shed a tear about? fuck them. These are the people who are gonna preserve “liberty” in the MMA world. Yeah… my ass.
by mmalogic on Mar 22, 2010 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I’m trying to get worked up over this but it’s hard to build any rage on behalf of Sherdog, heck I didn’t really notice any difference in their coverage in the last year with the credentials anyway. It’s really bad of Dana to pull this crap but I just can’t bring my self to give a damn about Sherdog losing it’s credentials yet again. Justified or not the UFC will have to give this shit up one day soon as it just holds them back too.
As for the Lindland film, it’s a shame that it seems just as jaded and biased as everything else around. It’s like he couldn’t look in depth without the cheap theatrics and personal grudge. It would of made his point a lot better without all that crap.
There are very few people in MMA that could make a movie called Fighting Politics and get me to think it’s anything more than a jaded pile of crap. Matt Lindland is not one of those very few people.
Yea a better title would of been “Matt Lindland has an ax to grind”
by who me on Mar 22, 2010 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know what the whole documentary is about, but the clips released seem to focus heavily on Dana White. Somebody say ‘bitter’. Wow, they were making Lindland look like the UFC cut the best fighter in MMA. I was rolling in laughter at this sound bite be Jeff Sherwood on Lindland, “…If he was in the UFC, he could be ranked Number 1”.
Is Jeff Sherwood serious? What a joker, No.1, Really!
by higgledy-piggledy on Mar 23, 2010 6:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Fuck… Know your target audience. You’re writing to people who watch the simpsons and south park. Either dumb yourself down or go write for the Harvard Review.
I should say “educated”. The target demo has been educated by south park and the simpsons… the reason why Dana gets so much support is because he speaks their language – establishing instant rapport.
DO YOU WANT TO BE A FUCKING FIGHTER!!!!!!!
seriously, if we are going to have the Simpsons-South Park low brow vs. high brow discussion the answer is that they are both and thus are highly successful.
watchkalibrun.com
Speaking of low brow entertainment
What happened to Dana’s producing vehicle for Spike? The Boston mob show that he said would be like The Sopranos before “they went soft”?
He’s also a gay Roman Catholic…that seems counter-productive…
New Orleans Saints - 2010 Super Bowl Champions. Unbelievable. Who Dat.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Mar 22, 2010 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
but...
DEY TOOK AWR JAWBS!!!!!
Keep firing Assholes!
Blackout is always right
by Ubernoober on Mar 22, 2010 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
“Scott Tenorman Must Die” is a Titus Andronicus reference if I’ve ever seen one. It is also the best South Park episode ever aired.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
by loboplata on Mar 22, 2010 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
that was the very first episode of south park i had ever watched. i had never been more offended in my entire life and it was awesome.
That was a real kick and good for laughs and lashings of the old ultraviolent.
by mistake4 on Mar 22, 2010 8:33 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
i'm guessing you're a strikeforce fan?
I'm like PacMan fightin you silly kids... throw ya Hatton the ring, and get knocked outlike Ricky did.
lol.
Family Guy is like Brandon Vera
Pre-haitus, it was awesome…after its return, not so much…
New Orleans Saints - 2010 Super Bowl Champions. Unbelievable. Who Dat.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Mar 22, 2010 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
What's the big deal?
I understand the sport vs spectacle and how important having unbiased journalist asking the tough questions is a big part of sports today. However, I didn’t notice much difference at all when Sherdog has credentials and when they didn’t. Is BE credentialed? I don’t know the answer. I’m guessing no, and this is the best MMA website on the planet for news. So who gives a flying fuck about credentials? Really.
Dana will get the tough questions from SOMEONE somewhere. If he doesn’t like it he can keep kicking people out and do press conferences with horses.
Fair nuff
But as a consumer of this product how does it effect me? I’m not seeing it. How does it effect Sherdog’s coverage? I’m not seeing that either.
As long as they don’t pull Helwani’s credentials they’re cool with me.
by Polyhedron on Mar 22, 2010 7:55 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
As long as they are selling UFC PPVs to the right of his posts, I would not worry about that.
by smoogy2 on Mar 22, 2010 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I dunno
BE aren’t credentialed, right? ;)
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh. Well than just ignore my fail joke in that case.
by The Flying Gentleman on Mar 22, 2010 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions
so the rules change?
I'm like PacMan fightin you silly kids... throw ya Hatton the ring, and get knocked outlike Ricky did.
lol.
What rules?
smoogy just said that it was unlikely that Ariel would be losing his creds when they’re selling UFC PPV’s.
He didn’t say anything about rules or anything.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, M-1 couldn’t buy clout with the MMA media if they tried. They get virtually no coverage of their events in English. If you only read the popular blogs, you might not even realize they put on about 20 shows per year.
I have no way to watch them otherwise I’d cover them. Then again I just like watching fights.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions
If RVCA gets a ban by being on Fedors shirt for a CBS show, then pimping M-1 is certainly enough to get creds pulled. RVCA is paying to be a sponser, sherdog is not paying for access. Also, a point I made in a deleted post, sherdog is run by a cowboy fan, they are not to be trusted.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
Sorry...
I deleted the earlier one since Luke was working on this epic.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
No worries, Just to make it clear. I hate the cowboys.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
My brothers a Colts fan. At least one Sunday a year I’m prepared to toss him into on coming traffic.
They are both AFC, hardly worth my hate.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
Americans team, yes.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
America’s Team*
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
I am in America right now and it’s pretty great.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
by szucconi on Mar 23, 2010 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ya, I didn't think so.
Thought maybe Sherdog spoiled another TUF twist
That's what I'm thinking
Fighter’s Only reported about Tito being ill.Sherdog never really said anything about Tito’s health,but put up a story about Chuck-Franklin.
I think it’s a combo of that,plus the Lindland film.
Check out my MMA highlight videos!
http://www.dailymotion.com/WheelchairBandit
Sherdog spoiled an episode of TuF once on their site (I think it was TuF4).
They should never be credentialed for anything again.
Their site is conjecture, their forum fan base are retarded, most of their articles are garbage.
The only reason they are even in business is because they have been around for a long time, it has nothing to do with merit.
in fairness to them, when the winner of the season is promised a title shot people want to know who is fighting for a title shot. That is a huge get.
watchkalibrun.com
Nobody has done it since then, obviously they learned their lesson. (UFC or Sherdog, depending on if the UFC just put a better muzzle on it, or if Sherdog got the info and refused to post it.)
The whole point of watching the show (even though TUF 4 was fucking terrible outside of the Captain Miserable joke) is to find out who is the best among a group of competitors. It’s no different from spoiling the end of a big movie. No matter how shitty the movie is, for anyone to defend such a move as “reporting the news” is laughable to idiotic.
by David Castillo on Mar 22, 2010 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions
There's the basic disconnect
This is a sport—not a reality show. The idea that the needs of a reality show should circumvent the standards of sports and sports journalism in the 21st century is entirely foreign to me.
Just because it’s foreign to you doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. Reality tv is big business (and not just UFC reality tv).
Predetermined events that are revealed to the public at the right time are an certainly an element of entertainment, but I struggle to think of any analogue in modern sports.
MMA is still heavy on the wrong side of “sports entertainment”, be it the UFC, Pride, Dream, or Strikeforce. Part of that has to do with MMA as a business which still relies on odd venues like TUF, and the signing of Herschal Walker to boost sales. And TUF 4 was explicitly designed as a gimmick into title contention, justified or not. Spoiling the winners means less fan interest into said moneymaker.
If there are difference standards it’s because MMA is an anomaly in the sports world. Regardless, this does nothing to change the fact that Gross spoiling the results for a show was a brain fart on his part.
by David Castillo on Mar 22, 2010 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions
How far do you carry this?
Does that mean reporting the live results of a tape delayed ppv should also be verboten?
That's absurd on so many levels
Reporters report the news. I can’t think of any other sport that would try to tape delay something important as a fight result that will lead to a title shot.
Josh Gross was subsequently hired by Sports Illustrated, which I think says something about how actual journalists view his supposed offense.
by capital L on Mar 22, 2010 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
This is not new to sports. Listen to a post game press conference the Philadelphia Eagles head coach Andy Reid attends. Not one reporter will ask the hard questions and if they do they are black balled by the team. Look at Bill Parcell and Bill Belichick reporters are down right intimidated by them.
the coaches are also forced to talk to the media buy the NFL. In fact most sports force the athletes to talk to the media
watchkalibrun.com
The NFL fines players and coaches who don’t make themselves accessible to the credentialed media for at last 30 minutes post game.
It would be unfair to forget that the NFL also has extreme high dollar business deals in place with much of the credentialed TV media too. ESPN pays the NFL over a billion a year, they wouldn’t be too happy if their reporters got frozen out.
Oh believe me I’m aware, simply giving an example of what Zak was talking about.
The UFC is so largely self contained in terms of their revenue streams they can adopt an isolationist policy and still survive.
isolationism isn’t always a great policy. Just ask De Valera. Yes, I just went early 20th century Irish on you.
watchkalibrun.com
I’m early 21st century Canadian of Irish ancestry, does that get me any points?
In any event, yes I get your point. My larger concern with an isolationist policy by the UFC is from a sporting perspective. Who’s there to hold the UFC accountable and make sure everything is on the up and up? That’s not to say I’m accusing them of any impropriety, but there should be some accountability to the 5th estate.
That’s right, I just went modern American poly-sci on you!
Oh definitely the UFC lives in a big propaganda bubble but lets not act like other sports don’t exert (or have exerted upon them) pressure to mold the media dialog to their liking. If anything big sports media reporting works more along the lines with the UFC’s dealings with Yahoo than anything else. Sherdog doesn’t have that kind of relationship with them. Heck as has been pointed out it seems that the reason that White made peace with Sherdog to start with was due to a potential ESPN deal, it is the future direction they will have to go if they want to grow. Lets just not pretend that it’s all on the up and up revolving around true integrity because in the end it’s all about the way the money flows.
Think steroid scandal. Were that same thing to happen in the UFC (most of the top fighters turn out to be using)…would the MMA media be able to aggressively push the story and help bring things to light? Or would we all just have to back off so as not to be blackballed?
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 22, 2010 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
so use the rec button
click on “actions” then click “rec”
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Mar 22, 2010 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
1. How hard does NFL reporters really chase the steroid issue? (to be fair the NFL got out in front of the issue early and diverted a lot of the issue onto the other big sports).
2. How long was MLB able to work damage control on the subject before it really blew up in their face? It was really Canseco’s theatrics and the congressional hearings that blew the lid of baseball.
3. As has been pointed out it’s the fact that the relationship goes both ways that allows network reporters to push as much as they do. As far as the UFC is concerned Yahoo reporters would have a better shot at pushing the UFC on the topic than reporters from here would. Journalism is great and all but it’s the business relationships that give the leverage to ask the hard questions in modern sports reporting.
The problem here isn’t that Zuffa lacks the open door journalistic relationship of the other sports it’s that they lack the web of media/business relationships other big sports have built up over the years. It’s about the leverage that money flow gives the media conglomerates and what those conglomerates are willing to let their reporters dig into, that type of relationship really doesn’t exist in the UFC sphere. You can imagine that if CBS sports wanted to look into steroids in Strikeforce they would probably get more resistance from CBS than from Strikeforce because Strikeforce needs the business relationship with CBS.
by who me on Mar 22, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I can certainly get behind this sort of rational thought.
It just drives me up the wall that some people can be comfortable with the idea that it is a laudable development.
I don’t like it but I’m old (and I work for OSHA), idealism was beaten out of me a long time ago. The idea that a financial relationship would push a company to be more open and do a better job fixing their mistakes instead of hiding them is a evil I can live with because it does get the job done. If it takes financial leverage to get that journalistic foot in the door then at least the foot gets in the door.
What I do worry about would be a situation where they get too close to being the same thing (such as CBS nearly buying EliteXC), then the money trail could really hinder reporting instead of giving leverage to the reporter.
Thus is the plight of the modern MMA journalist. I just pray to God that Dana never hears my own radio rants. I’d like credentials to a UFC someday :p
Inland Empire MMA Examiner
http://www.mmarecap.com
http://www.throwthembows.com
Think for yourself. Your perspective is infinitely more valued than anyone's opinion.
Sherdog is heavy on opinion.
MMAJunkie, Ariel Helwani, some on BE, MMAPayout report the news.
Sherdog, Josh Gross, Loretta Hunt……
You’re going to get banned for shitting on the company that provides you the content that drives your site. Imagine ESPN shitting on the NFL and it’s commissioner all the time.
by snakecharmer1340 on Mar 22, 2010 8:53 PM EDT reply actions 6 recs
exactly.
don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
by Austin Martin on Mar 22, 2010 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions
In other words, Don't tell your friend what a piece of... he is and...
…. get mad when he doesn’t invite you to his party.
by snakecharmer1340 on Mar 22, 2010 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions
MMAPayout report the news
Are you seriously trying to make a point about reporting news and using MMAPayout as an example?
Does Adam Swift still write for Sherdog?
I read the top part of their articles.
The opinion part at the bottom i’ll skim but they’re separate.
by snakecharmer1340 on Mar 22, 2010 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions
The difference is ESPN reports the news, and they are not employees of the NFL. The same thing applies to Sherdog and the UFC.
ESPN pays the NFL 1.1 billion dollars a year for the rights to NFL games, they aren’t employees but they aren’t just let in to report out of the goodness of the NFL’s heart. Lots of money changes hands and Monday Night Football is a huge deal for ESPN too. There is a very real business relationship between the two entities.
Sherdog reports news as well
Are you really unable to tell the difference between their journalistic output and their opinion pieces?
Do the math...
how many are connected to Sherdog in that Dana White/UFC hit piece movie they’re all pushing? A lot. Sherdog was banned by the UFC for 4 years.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
by snakecharmer1340 on Mar 22, 2010 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't understand your formula at all
This movie was filmed some time ago, during at point at which the UFC and Sherdog were already in some sort of spat. If the release of this old news is really the independent variable bringing about the new revocation, it’s an incredibly calculation.
Beyond that, Sherdog and the UFC are hardly enemies, even if Dana White is madder than the Ulti-man at them. They happily cover the sport and the promotion. Dana White happily (in his own way) promotes his product and by extension the sport. They don’t need to be friends, but they can hardly be enemies.
“I guarantee you she(Gina Carano) will single-handedly garner more press and media attention than UFC 100. Just wait and see.” -Loretta Hunt
This speaks volumes to the joke that is Loretta Hunt. When I read that last year she lost all credibility with me. Ax to grind much.
by logan00 on Mar 22, 2010 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Sure I also think Hunt goes out of her way to write and say negative stuff about Dana/UFC but it makes no difference in Jornalism. Would Hal and Hank Steinbrenner put a stop to Mike Lupica’s or the whole NY Daily News Credentials for that matter for saying or writing negative articles ? NO Why becasue it happens all the time its sports journalism. I usally side with the UFC on most Beefs but not this.
Nice tidbit.
Did you forget about the piece she wrote later saying “Damn, I was swept up in Carano hype and said something totally silly. I was wrong. Sorry dudes.”
Because she totally wrote that too.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Yeah…but that would kill their ability to effectively bitch!
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 23, 2010 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions
I disagree with this line of thought. She did come clean about making a mistake, which was great and very big of her. The fact she made THAT mistake in the first place is very telling about her stance on the UFC and her sort of delusions about MMA as a whole, which I think was the point on the initial post.
by Chris Barton on Mar 23, 2010 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Let me get this right for you.
You’re going to get banned for shitting on the company that provides you the content that drives your site. not kissing the ass of an organization of the sport that you cover.
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
LOL
The NFL wouldn’t do a damn thing to ESPN.
The public outrage would tarnish the brand incredibly.
The NFL doesn’t feed ESPN, while not complete, it is largely the opposite.
ESPN’s cheerleader like content drives fans to the NFL.
All the major sports have had problems with bloggers
The NHL, NBA, and NFL has had several teams ban or try to curtail certain bloggers. Off the top of my head I can not think of any in MLB, but that may be because I don’t follow it.
Usually what happens is the Blogger screams about it at the top of their lungs and it gets resolved one way or the other.
The fact that Sherdog and ESPN.com won’t comment on it seems to be the much more interesting thing to me.
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 22, 2010 9:45 PM EDT reply actions
for the record
For the most part every team in the NHL gives creds to SBN bloggers
watchkalibrun.com
I agree but there has cesrtainly been situations in the NHL where bloggers have been leaned on
I remember the Oilers had a member of the press from a tiny local paper, Vue weekly, who had a prees pass via that paper but was doing a live blog in the press box. In the blog he commented on how hard it was to watch the Oilers and he had his pass threatened.
http://www.vueweekly.com/article.php?id=9999
by six_fish_charlie on Mar 22, 2010 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Even some of the NFL teams do – Canal Street Chronicles got credentialed to go to the Super Bowl.
New Orleans Saints - 2010 Super Bowl Champions. Unbelievable. Who Dat.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Mar 22, 2010 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn't luke still work in part or contribute to sherdog?
and if so; then thats a conflict on interest.
I don’t think you understand what conflict of interest means.
by Michael Rome on Mar 22, 2010 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Conflict of Interest
I dont see how, this is a sports blog…opinion. Its not like Sherwood paid him to write this bit. Or did he….? I dont know who to trust anymore.
Holy snapping duck shit...
You should trust Kevin Iole. He tells it like it is or at least how Dana tells him it is.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not trusting Kevin either..if Dana doesn’t Tweet it with his only little greasy fingers, then I’m not buying it. Tito is fighting Chuck right?
Holy snapping duck shit...
I was being sarcastic. The fact that Dana is a promoter is enough of a reason for me not to rely solely on anything he says as news. But yet to his devote followers take it as gospel.
Why would Dana suggest that the Chuck and Tito fight is still on? He doesn’t have any anterior motives like preserving interest in an entire season of TUF that has yet to air right?
TUF 10 was the bestest ever just like Dana said. Kimbo came back and fought and everything. James Toney was a giant freak-show of a signing UNTIL Dana actually pulled the trigger. Now he is legit combat sports veteran who can make a run in MMA…cuz Dana told me so. Oh yea, Herschel and Jose are still freak-shows cuz Dan told me they were.
And Fedor is still fighting nobodies and would get crushed in the UFC.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s him being a fight promoter not some kind of evil media censorship monster though. What is surprising about those stories is that so many people still haven’t figured out that fight promoters promote fights. It’s in his job description to work the crowds to get them to tune in to his product.
I guess my concern would be A) the lack of legitimate MMA media coverage which points out that Dana is a promoter and B) the naivety of the general MMA fan who started out getting all their MMA news from UFC.com and yahoosports and simply doesn’t know better…cuz Dana gives out free tickets.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s not the UFC’s fault that people in general are gullible. Hell promoters have been counting on that for hundreds of years.
That’s fine…people are dumb. I get it. But I am not gonna be THAT guy and buy everything they are selling simply because its for sale.
I guess I would just expect BE readers to understand this and no be so militant about the greatness of said ringmaster or snake-oil salesman. Perhaps my expectations are just too high.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:15 AM EDT up reply actions
By and far BE readers do seem to get it, just because some guys defend the guy doesn’t mean they are suckers for his pitch. This is the internet and in the MMA realm working guys who can’t get past which org they love the most is a game for a lot of people. It’s the people who don’t read the internet at all that you would expect too fall for the snake oil pitch but then they are going to do it even if they know it’s a lie. At the end of the day the vast majority of people just want to watch some fights, they couldn’t give a shit about the rest of this stuff.
There's only one conflict on interest I'm concerned about
And that’s whether or not the Buff is going to have to can his show.
It’s a lifestyle program rather than an MMA show after all.
They allow me to contribute on occasion
And I’ve never received a dime for anything I’ve written there. I can get paid if I do the paperwork, but I just never have.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Mar 22, 2010 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions
So luke contributing to sherdog might in no way effect his interest in defending them/ drawing attention to the subject?
Just like breen working for them for years and having well documented problems with Dana doesn’t effect him drawing attention to it.
Sherdog was fine without credentials (when Josh Gross was there)
I used to read every article. I got a lot out of the Beatdown and the post-event video interviews. Sherdog seemed (and seems) to have a lot of access to fighters independent of credentials. Of course some details must be lost to journalists who have to buy their own tickets, but I was happy with the coverage I got at the time.
Sadly, I think the quality of reporting has gone down during Loretta Hunt’s tenure. I only skim the headlines now. Credentials weren’t enough to keep me interested as a reader.
Yeah, yeah, this isn’t the point of the BE post, but I think it’s worth thinking about what Sherdog has gotten done without credentials (assuming I’m right that the non-credentialed reporting was pretty good). I think Gross (and Sherwood maybe) has made the point on the radio that they covered events just fine when they had to pay their own way.
by former tuf noob on Mar 22, 2010 11:03 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Let me add that I’m not a Dana White apologist and that I’m not a fan of what he’s done. I just wanted to point out the good work that Sherdog has done without credentials.
by former tuf noob on Mar 22, 2010 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree. Sherdog will roll on without credentials, its just crazy how this kind of schoolyard shit goes down. Like the txt msg’s Gross was getting from White. I think someone hurt his feelings…..: (
Holy snapping duck shit...
Open letters.
Crazy and funny. Josh’s open letter to Dana was funny, out of line, and unnecessary.
That being said, I do think it hurts Josh’s commentary though. Last I checked — maybe he has changed his mind — he is still fixated on the UFC co-promoting with M-1. At this point I do not see how you can be with Fedor’s management on this one. I’m not convinced there will be a good ending for Scott Coker, and that would be a shame for MMA. Strikeforce before Vadim and friends had been a well-run promotion.
If there’s someone Josh should write an open letter to, it’s Fedor.
by former tuf noob on Mar 23, 2010 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess that’s why I just can’t get too angry about this, it’s not like I noticed much of difference with or without the credentials at Sherdog. Zuffa pulling credentials is definitely a bad thing but we are talking about Sherdog here, they are the same with or without them. At this point access to guys in the sport isn’t really based on credentials anyway.
They have made that point before. I think credentials was a matter of convenience for Sherdog but never a necessity.
Sherwood, Gross and other have went as far as to say that they would rather not be credentialed than to have their content censored like it were Soviet Russia. Someone brought up the fact that sites like MMAJunkie only report the news and that’s true. Which is why they break so many stories and have so much access. It doesn’t mean they are legitimate journalists. Any decent PR department could do what they do. Kevin Iole does what they do. I don’t respect that kind of journalism. Listen to Junkie radio and tell me those guys don’t live in fear of saying something Dana doesn’t like and getting hammered for it.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Dana does not agree…There can be only ONE method. His.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Dana has no say at all in what gets reported he can only force reporters to pay for their own tickets to the show and keep them out of his post fight press conference. The UFC may seem to exert some control but come on that place leaks like a sieve. We are constantly getting daily news stories about the sport from every angle.
Dana has no say at all in what gets reported he can only force reporters to pay for their own tickets to the show and keep them out of his post fight press conference.
Please tell me this is sarcasm. Yes, Zuffa has very little influence on what gets reported about their company. I am being sarcastic as well.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Well judging by how good a job he did at stopping this article I would have to say that his control just isn’t as godlike as some people seem to think it is. Yes he has leverage but that is no different than any other sport and that does go both ways. I would say he can use the credentials to exert some control on some sources but the very fact that they don’t give them to everyone (and no sport credentials everyone who ask) means that there are a hell of a lot of sources that he has no control over at all. Dirt gets out and even if guys don’t go on the record it doesn’t mean that they aren’t talking to media guys all the time, Dana can’t control the sources and he can’t control what news sites chose to print (unless it’s just blatant slander that opens them up for lawsuit and even then it’s going to be hit or miss on the internet). Do you honestly believe that Dana White has some sort of censorship power that effects the entire media reporting on his company? Do you honestly believe that he can stop the presses?
Yes, he failed to stop an article on a blog site that he doesn’t consider legitimate media OR credential. Clearly the average MMA fan comes here every day. Dana must be slipping.
And no, Dan doesn’t have censorship power over the ENTIRE MMA media…Sherdog being a perfect example. But he has it over most of the other major contributors and that is troublesome from my POV.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t really see all that much of an issue. Kevin Iole is a tool but Meltzer isn’t and he’s one of the biggest sources in the sport for news. The relationship with Yahoo hasn’t let to Meltzer getting censored or losing his spot. Dana does Carmichael Dave’s show all the time and he even dug extensively into Sherdog losing the credentials the first time. Ariel Helwani does an outstanding job too. There are a lot of guys out there doing some good work reporting in MMA and yea there are a number of guys who are parrots but that does exist in every sport too. Credentials aren’t some kind of magic censorship machine that gives White some kind of hold on MMA media. You don’t have to have credentials to report on the sport and for that matter White pulling Sherdog’s credentials could have as much to do with his personal feud going back years as it does with any kind of push for current media control.
What has Helwani ever said negatively about the UFC?
Melzgar is an old-school guy w/a lot of cred. He can’t be pushed. He would be the exception rather than the rule.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Why do you have to say anything negative to be a good journalist and report the facts about what you are reporting? He doesn’t write hit articles on the UFC but what he does report on he does a damn good job of it. Not every reporter is going to be Bob Woodward and not every MMA story requires you to dog out Dana White in order to tell that story. Helwani’s interviews don’t seem to pull many punches and it’s not like he’s avoiding controversy, he does a good job as a MMA journalist.
Dave Meltzer is a pro wrestling writer, his credibility outside of MMA circles is going to be strongly affected by that. Still he’s not the only guy writing deep articles and talking to lots of sources in the sport. He’s at the top of the heap as far as MMA journalist go but he’s not an exception to the rule, hell lots of guys have juicy sources and write good stuff.
Why do you have to say anything negative to be a good journalist and report the facts about what you are reporting?
Because negative things happen all the time in Zuffa and someone has to report it? Right?
Negative things happen in baseball and someone of some validity says something right? Negative things happen in the government and someone has an opinion. Why is Zuffa so very different of an animal?
If a chemical plant is dumping toxins into your drinking water then the requirement of the news is not to simply report it but give reasons as to why that is bad for you.
Although. this analogy fails in the MMA media because something so negative would never be reported in the first place.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Negative things are reported on a daily basis about Zuffa, it never ends on the internet. Are you seriously saying there isn’t enough negative articles about the UFC and White written on the internet? That doesn’t mean that every journalist out there should write negative articles about Dana White all the time, there is a hell of a lot of other news going on out there that people are interested in seeing reported. Hell the Dana White crap gets old after a while anyway, people are fans of the sport not just hungry for gossip about the inner workings of Zuffa. They want to hear reporting on all the subjects too. It’s a prize fighting sport most people want to read about the fighters, that is good journalism too. Just because the MMA media isn’t going TMZ on Zuffa 24/7 doesn’t mean that they are all scared or under his control.
I wish this was true--
And I can say with certainty—it is far from true.
Content is vigorously self-edited by many. Worthy topics are overlooked with great frequency out of fear of reprisals and denial of access.
I could go on.
Yeah, I think I remember those Sherwood/Gross conversations on air. This was after the radio show started streaming live, right? TJ would read a listener e-mail on this every few months and Josh would sound off on it for a little bit. Or it would somehow come up during that long intro segment on the Savage Dog Show where they wouldn’t really talk about anything.
I don’t read MMA Junkie anymore, but what Dann Stupp and co. do has its place. I’m less sanguine about Iole given how uncritical he seems to be of what he gets. (FWIW, he’s been perfectly polite over e-mail.)
by former tuf noob on Mar 23, 2010 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I always appreciated a different point of view. I want the freedom to decide on what it is right or what is wrong. I dont want to live in a world where it could be feeding me shit and I am convinced that it is steak because nobody told me so. Sherdog never had anything to gain for putting up editorials that were anti-UFC/Dana, it wouldnt start a revolution among the hardcore and occasional few casual fan readers that visit the site nor it would provide them shitloads of money. It actually endagers their staple food. Its a matter of opinion. We should cherish the fact that we are in a system where we are allowed to evaluate opinions and choose what is logical.
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
Negative news does draw more traffic and as you said their negative news wasn’t really going to hurt the UFC that badly anyway. They do gain by higher traffic without much of a risk, heck even losing the credentials doesn’t mean much at all for Sherdog their reporting will be the same as it always has been and they will still be able to get at any dirt that was available beforehand. It’s a bad thing but lets not overblow it’s importance as far as us getting our MMA news goes, hell if you hadn’t of known they had credentials for the last year or so would you of been able to tell a difference? Lets not act like the UFC has got Sherdog pulled off the internet or silenced their voice they are just not going to give them free press passes anymore. It’s bad but it’s not the sky falling bad.
I figured it would sound “sky is falling” kind of comment though I understand it isnt. Its a general point of view on things that I felt needed to be said. I appreciate your posts, they are realistic, but I still prefer to be ideal at times.
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
Idealism is a wonderful thing, hold on to it as long as you can because the world wants nothing more than to crush it out of your soul.
As far as the idealistic view on this story goes, Sherdog didn’t need the credentials anyway and now they don’t have to worry about keeping the UFC happy to keep them, they are free to bomb away. Dana can’t stop the press he can just make them pay to get into his events. In this sport in this age it’s going to be impossible to keep anything buried for long.
I think its the “if you are not with me, you are against me” idealogy Dana is promoting. They are making samples out of Sherdog. The idea of free press should be promoted by the sport and its organizations. The control that UFC have in MMA is undeniable as small movements like this needs to be checked. Sherdog will be always be there, but its the idea that you need to be in my side (UFC side) in order to survive the business is alarming folks. I think most of the writers here understands the influence of UFC in the sport and there could be a possibilty (i dont know how much) that we live in a Zuffa nuthugging media coverage if we let things slide.
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
You also have to remember that we are still swimming with some very small fish in the MMA media world. I absolutely love the guys here but they just don’t have the leverage to make Zuffa break a sweat. If ESPN ever wanted to get serious about covering the sport then Zuffa would be their media bitch. We think about Zuffa as the big dogs in MMA but in the real world of professional sports and media they are tiny little minnows themselves.
I also think that perhaps pushing an idealogy on White is a bit much, he doesn’t seem like that deep of a thinker. This may not go much deeper than the fact that he has a hair up his ass for the internet media and really really dislikes the guys at Sherdog. He’s more of a sandbox bully than a propaganda mastermind. It’s not a defense of him because he really is a dick in a lot of ways it’s just that people may be thinking he wields more control than he does outside of Zuffa’s home office.
Dana Says "Don't Be Critical"
All journalists should be allowed to give their opinions without fear of consequences from the government, private business or anyone else. The point of the media is not simply to report the news but to interpret it and to give opinions on whether it is good or bad for you the consumer, fan, citizen etc.
Why is MMA the only sport where giving opinions means you are not real media? It just seems like more of the same from Zuffa to me. The want to control what the fans see, hear and read about their product. They want to manipulate the media, both online and otherwise. Anyone who comes to BE and considers themselves a hardcore fan should have a problem w/that.
I am not sure why Dana has so many White Knights on BE and everywhere else but sooner or later, you either have to open your eyes or get on the payroll.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 22, 2010 11:33 PM EDT reply actions
This is the internet, most of the people who follow this enough to chat with others are doing it for their own entertainment and playing the org wars game seems to be great entertainment for a lot of people. Heck your “white knights” comment makes me wonder if you don’t enjoy partaking of that game a bit yourself?
Besides all sports work in a similar fashion to try and shape the conversation in their favor, they all have media relations departments that work at that full time. The UFC may control who gets credentials but that doesn’t have any real control at all over what news and opinions get written. It’s two very separate issues that people seem to be overlapping. Zuffa can’t control what the fans see, hear or read about their product and they know it. Hell that would be impossible, they are a relatively small entertainment company not a secret government entity with censorship control over what is printed. They may want to manipulate the media (what company doesn’t?) but that doesn’t mean that they do or even can. Do you seriously think that Zuffa exerts any control over what gets printed at all of our favorite little corner of the MMA internet here?
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t the major leagues (NBA,NFL etc) media coverage (online, print etc) tons of hugfest?
I am. I think. I will. - Ayn Rand
Yes and no. Some reporters hang on nuts and some have blatant agendas but there are a hell of a lot of good sports reporters out there who do it right and know how to dig the good dirt. Money always talks but bad news also gets the best ratings so regardless of how close media and the leagues get business wise there will always be a need for guys who go after the juicy stuff and tell it like it is.
I don’t know if you live in the NY area but if you ever try listening to the Michael Kay show on 1050ESPN it’s a giant blowjob fest when he talks about the yankees. This is someone on ESPNs payroll and the Yankees payroll. I think we’re overestimating the major sports as well. It happens all the time, but it’s just not reported.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m about a thousand miles from New York City and I wouldn’t listen to a radio show about baseball if you paid me (particularly the Yankees). There are suck ups everywhere and they are always going to be quite common but there is a good mix of crap to honest journalism in the big sports.
I tend to enjoy Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel, they don’t pull many punches with anyone on there.
oh it's not a show about the yankees
Michael Kay just always talks about them. Like its the most mastubatory show when it’s baseball season. I’m a sox fan and the discussion is atrocious, it just happens to be the best sports talk show at that time of day.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Largely Yes
Hugfests might even be an understatement.
You think the media didn’t know about Magic’s affairs?
About Michael Jordan?
About steroids in baseball a decade plus before Jose’s book?
Of course they did.
Meh, if your argument is that it happens in all sports and that makes it OK then I would say “No, it is still not OK”. Obviously, the media is manipulated everyday. But I would venture to say that Zuffa has greater control of what is reported about their company than the NBA,NFL, NHL or MLB combined. Their are a number of old-school journalists that cannot be bought or glad-handed in those other MAJOR sports. In MMA, there are very few because it is such a young sport.
Because or the relative youth and size of MMA, it is even more important that relevant MMA journalists be allowed to have their say. Sure, you can SAY that Zuffa has very little control over what is reported about them but ask yourself…who knows enough about MMA to report and be critical of it? The main-stream media is by and large ignorant. Which means, they report what Zuffa tells them to. So, all u have left is the online media.
Sherdog is a legitimate source of MMA news….not credentialed.
MMAjunkie reports news but can not be critical or get teh hammer.
MMAWeekly is a long-time respected source for MMA news. They have to watch what they say or get bant as they are now credentialed.
Yahoosports is/was a content partner of Zuffa and employs Kevin Iole(known UFC shill).
BE is considered a blog site and not legitimate journalistic source by Zuffa and are therefore not credentialed…ie they say stuff Zuffa doesn’t like.
So, of the major news sources for MMA, that actually know anything about MMA…how many are actually critical of Zuffa on any level?
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions
What your pointing out isn’t some kind of control of the media it’s just that Zuffa is lucking out that mainstream sports news media doesn’t give a shit about MMA and has never bothered to report on it. That isn’t Zuffa control it’s just a general lack of interest in what they do, by and large no one gives a crap about MMA out there. It’s the same reason you don’t get in depth reporting on pro wrestling very often the big guns just don’t care to waste their time with it. Once they decide to pick it up seriously then it’s a whole different ballgame as far as sports reporting goes. You don’t see ASNE going after Zuffa for sports credential issues.
As far as it happening all over sports, that doesn’t mean it’s ok it just means that it’s very common. It’s not like sports just give out credentials to anyone who ask or that they don’t pack them with tons of restrictions. That’s part of how that system works. Yes it sucks but it sucks all over. Of course getting credentials and writing news about a sport are very different things too, you don’t have to have credentials to report on a sport and you damn sure don’t have to have them to do investigative journalism work. It’s not that kind of control.
(1) Causes, (2) Jordan Breen's suggestion
I’m sure you can divide it into two channels: (a) control via ignorance of mainstream media types and (b) control via fear of losing credentials. I’m not sure which one is worse. Best case scenario is that you have big, important media outlets be well-informed and independent. I’m not sure (b) prevents this from happening; it depends on how much you think the well-informed smallish outfits are going to grow. I don’t think that’s the likely scenario, so I think (a) is worse. If true, it suggests that we want more arrangements of the ESPN-Sherdog type.
As an aside, is BE a news site? I don’t think news gets broken here often. Luke called it “opinion-led aggregation” on Jordan Breen’s show recently. I do think Jordan’s request for more long-form journalism should be considered here on BE. It could set the site apart. Anyone with an opinion can write the “boilerplate” (Breen’s term, or close to it, I think) event previews. Access to fighters is more scarce. BE’s one of the biggest blogs; my guess is that fighters read it. I could imagine BE staffers getting access to fighters leveraging the site’s reputation and writing these pieces. From his radio interview, I understand that Luke is trying to build some sort of media empire, but it seems like he wants to build something like another Sherdog. Why not do something different?
by former tuf noob on Mar 23, 2010 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Whatever the case, BE is not considered a legitimate news source by Zuffa and no one else in the main-stream media gives a shit, as pointed out so adequately above.
Therefore, BE’s opinions only matter to hardcore fans, which we have been led to believe, do not drive the sport. Casual fans simply don’t care. The number of Zuffa supporters who appear here only reinforce the fact that if Dana doesn’t say it, it must not be true.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 1:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I think you are mistaking Zuffa supporters. Most of us just want to watch fights and feel that shit like Gross reporting something that is pretty irrelevant to us as nothing more than his sour grapes.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions
You seem to be awfully hung up on “zuffa supporters” for your points and that is the worst most meaningless point to make out of all of them. First of all who cares what random people talking on the internet say when discussing how good the reporters are? Random people on the internet say and do all sorts of things all the time. Second why do “zuffa supporters” have to be some kind of bad or misled group? Just because they support the company doesn’t mean they are ignorant of the issues or mean that they only listen to Dana White. Third, every time you bring that up it makes me wonder if your in the “zuffa haters” group and stuck in org wars bias mode here. This isn’t an us or them type discussion, you don’t have to pick a side and blindly follow it.
Nah bro, I fall in the Zuffa-haters group simply out of necessity…because somebody has to do it. I find that far too many fans, hardcore and otherwise, do not feel the need to be critical of Zuffa’s actions.
I have to do my part and take the other side. By in large, I enjoy the Zuffa product and respect what they have done fore the sport. Having said that, I call it like I see it, for Zuffa or anyone else.
There is no need for me to talk about all the good Zuffa has done since there are 100 other guys who are ready, willing and able to do the same or more.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions
You just made the argument for why Ariel doesn’t need to ever write a negative article about Zuffa.
twitter.com/thisredengine
by Matthew Roth on Mar 23, 2010 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Hey man, no hate on Ariel…he is getting paid. He has to do what he has to do. And so am I.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Mar 23, 2010 2:11 AM EDT up reply actions
So your obsessed with the negative aspects of the business then, that’s really sad. I am sorry because honestly if I felt the need to focus on one specific negative part of the sport like that and ignore all the good stuff then I just wouldn’t watch the sport anymore because it would ruin it for me.
I deal with enough negative at work (this shit is just funny compared to the crap I see). MMA is my entertainment not my TMZ style obsession. In the grand scale of things what Dana White does or doesn’t do in a day matters very little compared to real world issues.
We're forgetting the important thing here....
We’re getting this news other places because Sherdog sucks. They used to be pretty good 5-7 years ago, but really the only reason an MMA fan with more than 20 brain cells goes there is for the fight finder. Their website sucks, their articles are bad to meh, and their forums are the most retarded section of the MMA community
No big loss on Sherdog not being at UFC events
Totally agree
I stopped going to sherdog for news ages ago. I listent to their radio shows and use fight finder but not much else. Their forums used to be OK 2 or 3 years ago but they seemed to be populated by 12 year old nut huggers.
Who wants to hug a 12 year olds nuts??
Seriously, I would be much more up in arms if it was BE that we were talking about, but right or wrong, I just can’t seem to get that upset over Sherdog.
by ultimatefightsource on Mar 23, 2010 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
How should I say this nicely...
If you go out of your way to cultivate an adversarial relationship with Dana White and the UFC, you really shouldn’t be surprised when your credentials get pulled.
From the TUF controversy to the latest little FUDANA speeches that went into that documentary, to a general distaste for the way Sherdog/ESPN cover UFC in comparison to DREAM/Strikeforce.
It’s really simple, the UFC doesn’t really gain that much from credentialing Sherdog, and while they don’t lose a lot by credentialing them it’s akin to tolerating a fly buzzing around your head. It’s annoying, and since you have a fly swatter eventually the fly is going to land on your food, piss you off enough, and you’re going to squash it.
Documentary endeavor or not, there is a reason why you don’t see many legitimate baseball reporters going out and doing a documentary about the steroid era with Jose Canseco. For instance, I don’t think DW could give a fuck less if you’re writing about the UFC on a consistent and fair basis, it’s when he thinks he sees a perceived slight in coverage IE giving more more coverage to Herschel Walker than BJ Penn/Silva/GSP, and then you’re going to talk shit about him on top of that?
That’s a thanks, but no thanks moment if I ever saw one.
Associate Writer - WindyCityGridiron.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
