11/21/24
July 29, 2010
ESPN Spikes LeBron James Party Story: A story about LeBron James partying at a Las Vegas nightclub was taken off the ESPN Los Angeles site shortly after publication. The story by Arash Markazi, reprinted elsewhere, describes a party held after James' Miami signing that included "apparently nude" women in bathtubs, go-go dancers and a flying male waiter on a wire delivering endless bottles of Ace of Spades champagne. "I wish they'd have one of the girls with no panties do that instead of the guy," said James, who was paid "six figures" to host the three-day party.
posted by rcade to basketball at 02:34 PM - 27 comments
From ESPN's statement: Arash did not properly identify himself as a reporter or clearly state his intentions to write a story
Translation: As a shill for the King, we failed to run the story by Lebron's people and get his permission to report whatever version of the truth he decided we could.
posted by graymatters at 03:01 PM on July 29, 2010
So LeBron hung out with a guy who has written for SLAM Magazine, XXL, King, the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Daily News, Associated Press, Sports Illustrated on Campus, SI.com and ESPNLosAngeles.Com and he didn't realize he would write about the party?
posted by rcade at 03:31 PM on July 29, 2010
Did Hunter S. Thompson just roll over in his grave?
Can ESPN not say "gonzo"?
Guess they really have cratered to LeBron. Oh, to be in his shoes!
posted by Spitztengle at 03:33 PM on July 29, 2010
While I do think that ESPN would pull a story protect a star such as LeBron, I do think that the ESPN story in this case does seem to hold a bit of water. In reading the article, it does feel a bit like a rough draft in the way it jumps from the party with Peter Pan to the night club with Lamar Odom. My guess is that this would still be a story in that ESPN killed a less than flattering story about LeBron, the issue here is that it actually got posted.
Overall, I felt that the story had little to no journalistic value. It felt more as if the author saw a chance to pile something on to the currently popular idea of bashing LeBron (not to say this isn't warranted). If I were an editor at ESPN I probably would have killed the story too, but just because the idea that an NBA player goes to clubs with scantily clad women isn't news. The author should have seen about writing the story for Inside Edition, because there it would have been seen as news.
posted by Demophon at 04:36 PM on July 29, 2010
Overall, I felt that the story had little to no journalistic value.
There are lifestyle pieces written about athletes all the time. The story wasn't just about an NBA player going to a club. LeBron was paid six figures to spend three days hosting that bacchanalia. It says a lot about him.
Killing the story also says a lot about ESPN. It's another sign the network is abandoning journalism.
posted by rcade at 04:55 PM on July 29, 2010
I commend ESPN for pulling this story. All in all it seems tame - just another weekend in the life - if you ask me. So if ESPN wants to keep their website above the tabloid fray in the wake of "The Decision," I say good for them. Nothing to see here - time to move on. Besides, as we learned with The Decision, Lebron and his team lack the creativity to plan something like what's described here, so I'm betting they were just paid guests - "the talent" as celebrity appearances go - and nothing more.
posted by MW12 at 06:57 PM on July 29, 2010
LeBron was paid six figures to spend three days hosting that bacchanalia. It says a lot about him.
If someone offered me six figures to host a party I'd do it. Hell I'd do it for less.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 08:25 PM on July 29, 2010
Hell I'd do it for less.
Yeah ... me too ... for a lot less!
posted by Spitztengle at 04:34 AM on July 30, 2010
Hell I'd do it for less.
Yeah ... me too ... for a lot less!
Shit, I'll do it for free.
posted by BornIcon at 07:28 AM on July 30, 2010
So if ESPN wants to keep their website above the tabloid fray in the wake of "The Decision," I say good for them. Nothing to see here - time to move on.
The "nothing to see here" is clearly bogus, the rest is inconsistent: if they want to stay above the "tabloid fray", they've had plenty of chances to do that. For example, they could remove their embedded reporters from the field in front of Favre's house. To spike a story about someone who's effectively a business partner1, whatever the motive, is always going to stink.
1. Beyond "The Decision", which might not have brought in ad revenue during the show but certainly did for the hours and days around it, as part of ABC/ Disney, they're in bed with the NBA.
posted by yerfatma at 09:03 AM on July 30, 2010
ESPN is terrible. They are still in the protecting and pumping up phase of Lebron James. If he makes a mistake that others report on, then they will begin their 24-hour a day tear down cycle.
posted by bperk at 09:26 AM on July 30, 2010
BIG difference between reporting on whether Favre will return and whether Lebron does celebrity appearances. HUGE. Simply put: there is only one Favre, but EVERY celebrity on the planet does paid appearances in nightclubs - 99.9999999% of which are never reported. Sure - you can point to the ones TMZ details almost daily. But that is still just .00000001% of the ones going on - many of which are MUCH more wild and crazy. And since ESPN doesn't report on the rest of them, I reiterate my kudos to them for pulling the plug on this one.
And to all the ESPN haters, I have two suggestions: turn the channel and stop talking about them. Your obsession only makes them stronger!
I mean seriously - no f'ing shit they are in bed w the NBA, MLB, NFL, and every superstar athlete on the planet. That is their business. Get over it!
And of course they aired The Decision. You watched, didn't you?
posted by MW12 at 09:53 AM on July 30, 2010
And of course they aired The Decision. You watched, didn't you?
What is "The Decision" ? Is that a new ESPN reality show or something?
Haven't seen it, and not interested.
posted by cixelsyd at 09:58 AM on July 30, 2010
Simply put: there is only one Favre, but EVERY celebrity on the planet does paid appearances in nightclubs - 99.9999999% of which are never reported.
How do you know this, if they were never reported?
And to all the ESPN haters, I have two suggestions: turn the channel and stop talking about them.
ESPN dominates the sports media. If you follow sports and you consciously make an effort to get news from alternate sources, it's still difficult to avoid them entirely. I'd love to see a 24-hour sports channel that was real competition for them. On the web, I use Yahoo Sports instead of ESPN.Com. On the radio, when I have a choice between ESPN Radio and anyone else, I go with the latter. On TV, I generally watch ESPN only for live sports. I saw "the Decision" only to see who he was signing with and turned it off when he named the team.
posted by rcade at 11:02 AM on July 30, 2010
ESPN dominates the sports media.
This is where living in Canada really pays off. We have 3 legitimate sports networks (TSN, SportsNet, The Score), and all of them fight among themselves to provide sports and sports information.
TSN is currently the king (best anchor show (a spin-off of ESPN SportsCenter), best presentation quality), but SportsNet has the baseball coverage, while The Score is definitely the "hippest" (and most entertaining personalities) of the networks (and has the 24-hour sports ticker at the bottom).
posted by grum@work at 12:30 PM on July 30, 2010
I saw "the Decision" only to see who he was signing with and turned it off when he named the team.
That makes two of us but the reality is, "the Decision" was about an hour long and LeBron named his team towards the end.
I have no problem with ESPN pulling this story as the writer never identified himself properly or that he was going to be writing an article.
posted by BornIcon at 12:34 PM on July 30, 2010
And no problem with BP kicking out reporters if they don't properly cross their Ts and dot their Is? Who cares about some LeBron story? It's more the principle of the thing: if you let corporations control what news they want you to hear, you're in a world of hurt.
posted by yerfatma at 12:40 PM on July 30, 2010
That makes two of us but the reality is, "the Decision" was about an hour long and LeBron named his team towards the end.
It was around 25 minutes in. I know that because some sportswriters made a big deal out of how ESPN promised it would occur 5-10 minutes earlier than that.
And what Yerfatma said.
posted by rcade at 12:43 PM on July 30, 2010
It was around 25 minutes in.
I guess the drama made it seem longer.
posted by BornIcon at 12:58 PM on July 30, 2010
Yeah, your little ESPN monopoly is sucking recently down there. Sometimes they do amazing things. The 30 for 30 is just a gift that keeps on giving (though occasionally the gift is more like socks than say action figures) and the World Cup website was equally cool.
But the "reporting" is for shit. Utter shit.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:53 PM on July 30, 2010
they aired The Decision. You watched, didn't you?
No. Why watch it, when whatever his decision was would immediately be blasted all over every other media outlet?
ESPN used to be a monopoly, but now it makes up less than 10 percent of my sports viewing. The shark was long ago jumped.
posted by graymatters at 02:29 PM on July 30, 2010
Simply put: there is only one Favre, but EVERY celebrity on the planet does paid appearances in nightclubs - 99.9999999% of which are never reported.
How do you know this, if they were never reported?
I know this because I have been to a handful, organized a few, and get invited to them all the time. Events like these are a big business, and they are everywhere, in every major city (and some smaller ones too), every week.
And I wasn't suggesting that everyone with a negative opinion of ESPN is a hater - but increasingly it seems like ESPN is not only dominating the sports media but also SpoFi... And as much as we all seem to agree that The Decision was a ridiculous waste of an hour of our lives that none of us will get back, the obvious reason why ESPN aired it is because we are still talking about it - wasting additional hours of our lives which we'll never get back...
posted by MW12 at 03:14 PM on July 30, 2010
No. Why watch it, when whatever his decision was would immediately be blasted all over every other media outlet?
That was my philosophy. I found out very shortly after he announced it and I didn't have to even turn on my TV.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:44 PM on July 30, 2010
The Canadian broadcaster TSN was showing "The Decision" live, and when their version of SportsCenter came up, they did nothing but make fun of it the entire time.
And as much as we all seem to agree that The Decision was a ridiculous waste of an hour of our lives that none of us will get back, the obvious reason why ESPN aired it is because we are still talking about it - wasting additional hours of our lives which we'll never get back...
Lots of people didn't watch it, and we're not talking about it in glowing terms. We're talking about how ridiculous it was for ESPN to broadcast it. Having people talk about your work in negative terms for days on end isn't something that any company wants to have happen. Just ask British Petroleum.
Contrary to the turn of phrase, there IS such a thing as bad publicity.
posted by grum@work at 04:25 PM on July 30, 2010
Any publicity is good publicity.
Just ask Mel Gibson.
posted by graymatters at 06:03 PM on July 30, 2010
If someone offered me six figures to host a party I'd do it. Hell I'd do it for less. posted by Ying Yang Mafia
Well, of course. I'd do a lot of things for 6 figures. But LeBron is in a completely different tax bracket. I don't believe 'who wouldn't' applies here at all, because there are plenty of athletes that are his peers that would never do this. There's plenty of athletes that make a lot less than he does that wouldn't do this (right or wrong).
posted by justgary at 06:11 PM on July 30, 2010
Beat me to it. Here's ESPN's formal statement.