WFAA Blog: ESPN irresponsible for accusing 'Pacman' of threatening to kill 3 men

[WoodysGirl]

8:19 AM Fri, Jan 09, 2009 | Permalink
Dale Hansen
E-mail

Former Dallas Cowboys cornerback "Pacman" Jones was released Wednesday and ESPN says it was because he tried to kill some guys in Atlanta. They're doing a big story on it Sunday morning on their program "Outside the Lines."

They have three guys in silhouette, all friends, who didn't file any police report saying Jones threatened to shoot 'em, then have somebody else shoot 'em.

We called ESPN thinking there had to be more to the story than that, not expecting 'em to tell us what it was, but just that there was something.

ESPN says there's not. That's all there is. They're airing a story accusing "Pacman" Jones of trying to kill three guys because the three guys say so. That's quite a story.

Jones says he's gonna sue ESPN. Says it's not true.

And somewhere Edward R. Murrow is spinning in his grave.

You can watch video of Dale's comments here

 

[Alexander]

Dale Hansen? Does anyone pay attention to this imbecile anymore?

 

[khiladi]

Dale Hansen? Does anyone pay attention to this imbecile anymore?

So Dale Hansen was lying when he said he called ESPN asking them if there was anything more to the story?

 

[Alexander]

So Dale Hansen was lying when he said he called ESPN asking them if there was anything more to the story?

Did I say he was lying? I asked if anyone paid attention to this imbecile anymore. I assumed people with taste beyond aggressive tabloid type reporting even bothered. That's all.

He is one of the more notorious rumor-mongering hacks in the entire Dallas media contingent, but he is suddenly now concerned about journalistic integrity? I find that more than a little amusing.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I believe what he's saying and have thought this story stunk from the start.

And Hansen hates all thugs and criminal types more than anyone.... He's railed Pacman from the second it was reported Jerry was thinking about signing him. So for him to defend the guy, ESPN has to have a really flimsy "case" in this story.

BTW, with Hansen being the top dog at the ABC affiliate for years in a big market, I can see why they'd talk to him. We all know ABC owns ESPN.

And Alex, you must have Hansen mixed up with someone else. Hansen isn't a rumor mongering hack. He's got a very overbearing personality and can come off as extremely arrogant, but he's not one to make up stories.

 

[YosemiteSam]

No matter what actually happen, I just hope ESPN takes a shellacking to the point that they are forced to clean up the way they report things.

I would like to see ESPN forced to pay out whats left of Pacs $13.3M contract!

 

[WoodysGirl]

Dale Hansen? Does anyone pay attention to this imbecile anymore?

WFAA.com is on my regular list of sites to visit. Sometimes their blogs have nuggets different from some of the others.

 

[tyke1doe]

I've been critical of PacMan Jones, but Hansen has a good point.

If this information is no more than what police officers knew at the time but couldn't validate, why is it being aired now?

I'm a little uncertain as to why this information is being revealed now. I don't know whether it's because this information is now being discovered (the three men willing to talk) or if it's been known all along, but ESPN chose to air it now.

I guess one could argue ESPN chose to air it after the season than during the season when it could have been more damaging.

Still, Hansen has a point.

 

[theogt]

I thought they were supposed to have new video evidence or some such. Good lord ESPN is ridiculous.

 

[khiladi]

Did I say he was lying? I asked if anyone paid attention to this imbecile anymore. I assumed people with taste beyond aggressive tabloid type reporting even bothered. That's all.

He is one of the more notorious rumor-mongering hacks in the entire Dallas media contingent, but he is suddenly now concerned about journalistic integrity? I find that more than a little amusing.

Sounds to me like your accusing him of lying... He's a rumor-mogering hack right?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

It was a hit piece, but I think it will be difficult for Pac to win a slander suit since he's a public figure. He's got to prove malice on the part of ESPN. That's a tough thing to prove.

 

[AdamJT13]

I thought they were supposed to have new video evidence or some such.

They have surveillance video of the people involved arriving at the club. That was shown already this week.

The report supposedly was going to include something about "an informant" saying that Jones ordered the shooting. Maybe they'll report on that but weren't able to talk to that person. If the "informant" was simply one of the guys who was shot at, that's not exactly new information.

 

[BlueStar22]

I'm surprised Hansen is defending Pac.

 

[Alexander]

Sounds to me like your accusing him of lying... He's a rumor-mogering hack right?

That does not mean he is a liar. Just a hypocrite.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Pacman can't get anything right! This wouldn't be an issue if his guman hadn't missed! :laugh2:

 

[jterrell]

Hansen was probably digging into this, ironically, in order to blast away at Pacman(pun intended) like his media brethren and even the somewhat fat and lazy(success can do that to ya) Hansen felt he couldn't really do anything with the story so then decided to say if he couldn't ESPN shouldn't either.

I now feel almost certain Pacman wins judgment against ESPN.
They will air the story and that would probably not merit a trial verdict in Pac's favor but their reporter tipped off the team and calling one's employer to defame him is in fact something that can draw a verdict, especially since Pac was summarily fired.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Hansen was probably digging into this, ironically, in order to blast away at Pacman(pun intended) like his media brethren and even the somewhat fat and lazy(success can do that to ya) Hansen felt he couldn't really do anything with the story so then decided to say if he couldn't ESPN shouldn't either.

I now feel almost certain Pacman wins judgment against ESPN.
They will air the story and that would probably not merit a trial verdict in Pac's favor but their reporter tipped off the team and calling one's employer to defame him is in fact something that can draw a verdict, especially since Pac was summarily fired.

I don't think that's a true.

I think the reporter was doing his/her job as part of the overall investigation. That's why it's call investigative reporting.

Chances are slim that he can actually get a verdict. And with his finances being so bad, I don't think it's a good idea for him to waste what little he has trying to pursue any action.

 

[TheCount]

I don't think that's a true.

I think the reporter was doing his/her job as part of the overall investigation. That's why it's call investigative reporting.

Chances are slim that he can actually get a verdict. And with his finances being so bad, I don't think it's a good idea for him to waste what little he has trying to pursue any action.

From a wiki about celebrities suing gossip magazines for libel:

While gossip columnists’ “bread and butter” is rumor, innuendo, and allegations of scandalous behavior, there is a fine line between legally-acceptable spreading of innuendo and rumor and the making of defamatory statements, which can provoke a lawsuit. Newspapers and magazine editorial policies normally require gossip columnists to have a source for all of their allegations, in order to protect the publisher against lawsuits for defamation.


Celebrities or public figures whose private lives are revealed in gossip columns who believe that their reputation has been defamed – that is, exposed to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or pecuniary loss - can sue for libel. A gossip columnist cannot defend themselves from a libel claim by arguing that they merely repeated, but did not originate the defamating rumor or claim; instead, the columnist has to prove that the allegedly defaming statement was truthful, or that it was based on a reasonably reliable source.


In the mid1960s, Supreme Court rulings in the US made it harder for the media to be sued for libel. The court ruled that libel only occurred in cases where a publication prints falsehoods about a celebrity with “reckless disregard” for the truth. A celebrity suing a newspaper for libel must now prove that the paper published the falsehood with actual malice or with deliberate knowledge that the statement was both incorrect and defamatory.


Moreover, the court ruled that only factual misrepresentation is libel, not expression of opinion. Thus if a gossip columnist writes that they “...think that Celebrity X is an idiot,” the columnist does not face a risk of being sued for libel. On the other hand, if the columnist invents an allegation that “...Celebrity X is a wife beater,” with no supporting source or evidence, the celebrity can sue for libel on the grounds that their reputation was defamed.

Seems like it could go either way to me, a good lawyer can certainly finagle a verdict considering Jones lost his job.

Does ESPN think there's a chance these guys are lying? Yes. Could the accusation keep Jones out of work? Yes. Are three guys that were "at the club" reasonable witnesses to an accusation this big? Probably not.

BUT, does ESPN have deliberate knowledge that the statement is incorrect? Of course not, they weren't there, they can try to pass it off completely on these three stooges.

 

[gmoney112]

Solid journalism there BSPN

 

[HanD]

I'm surprised Hansen is defending Pac.

yep. he hates pac-rat as he calls him.