Well he definitely deserves major props for that
but his site is still a sports gossip blog
just go through it yourself
that isnt journalism
its faggotry
Porn Star Claims Tiger Woods Got Her Pregnant Twice
- Thread starter Michael Angelo
- Start date
Well he definitely deserves major props for that
but his site is still a sports gossip blog
just go through it yourself
that isnt journalism
its faggotry
Was she still in the industry while she was fucking Tiger? ...cause a porno actress not using some sort of birth control.... hell, if she was knocked up, it could have been anbody's kid. Little fucker coulda come outta the womb looking like Wesley Pipes 
Such ignorance
A- I already work for TMZ Sports
B- If you read the article I actually say it is in fact "hearsay" and highly unlikely to be true
C- What grown man says "sweet niggah"?
I was being sarcastic calling it an accomplishment... Greenberg was on the air the next night and it's like nothing happened, absolutely zero impact. I think his efforts were trivial.
Spreading manure and then adding parenthetically that it is likely bullshit doesn't mean you weren't spreading manure.
That's not what people are going to take away from your article... You posted the meat of the story here and obviously didn't think enough of that disclaimer to include it with that.
One who is mocking another grown man?
Public apology that was covered by USA Today and Chicago Sun Times..Yep Trivial..
Joslyn James claims are going to get 100x more coverage than that apology. The fact that something is covered in the paper (and then completely forgotten as the news cycle moves along) does not make it significant.
I have a simple answer to that. If you think it is "shit" then why do you have your hands in it?
Cause every reply to post essentially puts money in my pocket and in turn would lead a person to believe this is the type of stuff you want to read.
I posted her "quotes" I didn't say what I thought that is what my article for which people can choose to or not to click.
To your other comment I can see your whole gossip angle, but I still have no clue why that would make you want to call another man "sweet"..that seems strange to me, but hey whatever name calling is silly to me.
Whereas your point as the "news cycle" moving along that is true. The significance comes from the fact I know for a fact ESPN did not want to address it, but because of the "attention" it got address and I don't think we have to worry about Mr. Greenberg making any more "slips" in the future or an apology will be the least of his worries.
The overall point is Joslyn James or Mike Greenberg the goal is to create an interest in the story. And since I can post something at noon and get around to checking it at 11pm and people are talking about me, the story and the site means the goal has been accomplished. I could care less if it is positive or negative.
I agree with this point.
No offense intended but I'd be among the people who didn't bother to click... So me bumping this thread up six or seven slots on the front page probably doesn't help you all that much. I'm definitely not putting money in your pocket.
There is a huge difference between passively viewing bullshit and actively propagating bullshit.
Howard Stern got some sponsor to put up $100,000 prize for some contest involving Tiger Woods' mistresses. Now hoes are coming out of the woodwork claiming they were a mistress.
look at this bitches face. she looks like she fucks with that walter white.
Every time you bump that is one more lurker who becomes interested in what the "fuss" is about.
You have heard of Google Analytics right?
The stats don't lie BGOL prefer these type of posts than say a breakdown of Peyton Manning's legacy.
So being astute in my audience I give the people what they want. I really don't care about Tiger's NoHos, but good for business.
Fuck these hoes and the dudes responsible for their avenue to pulicity!
exactly
fuck that lying ass bitch
no way in hell she would of had an abortion if he knocked her up...not once but TWICE
GTFOH!!!
I understand your logic but like I said...
Plus, I don't doubt one bit that you applied the same logic to the Mike Greenberg story-- You went for what was "good for business," not what was good.
I wouldn't even knock you if you weren't trying to be full of shit about it, like you were defending the legacy of Dr. King and trying to stand up for what was right. You're a professional attention whore-- you're far from alone in that but it is what you are.
so turns out we actually have a tmz employee here
Actually to be perfectly honest that was "bad for business".
Which is why I thought real hard about it for about 45 minutes if I wanted to do it because I knew I would be the one if it went viral who would take the "backlash" from it.
Which is exactly what happened
I got nothing out of it except a headache, but I can look at myself in the mirror knowing I did the right thing.
How was it bad for business? Are you saying you pissed someone off or something?
I'm not the kind of guy who won't ever say I was wrong about something... Everybody can't save the world and I actually wanted to be a sportswriter when I was younger but I just wanted to have more of an impact... So that impacts my perception when I look at something like this and think about how unimportant it seems to be.
I kind of want to wish you luck but this TMZ shit really is the business of parasites. I would approach things differently if I were you. Then again, I don't know everything and maybe you really did feel you were trying to do good. If so, I commend your efforts in that instance.
Two things let me know that yes, Tiger was, in fact, on some other shit.
1. That message.
2. He was banging a homely waitress who worked not far from his home, the home with the infinitely hotter wife who could take half his shit (and apparently beat his ass like a drum) if so inclined.
Just like any industry there is politics involved.
Think of it like the music industry.
Bloggers/independent sites are like "underground/independent" rappers and ESPN and others are like Majors Jay Z's of the industry.
You want to be able to do business with Live Nation, but you make a diss song about Jay that goes viral. You see how that can be an issue?
The TMZ thing is different. They aren't my boss, they don't tell me what to do and I am not hiding in bushes. I do what I do comfortable with and refer people to them.
O RLY? Who wrote this back in July?
ESPN Is Like Madonna
CLICK TO REACT
ESPN is like Madonna. Back in the day they were both hip -- you felt like you were connected to them on a personal level. Thirty years later they are talking with strange accents and disconnected from the general public. The Worldwide Leader in Sports has proven this disconnection once again in their coverage of Ben Roethlisberger's sexual assault case.
The explanation I got was that ESPN does not report on civil cases that don't have criminal complaints. I was told that the policy has been in effect for twenty years and, since the plaintiff did not file a criminal complaint, it was a "non-story." They sent out a memo that stated that no one in the company could talk about the story.
It may have been a good policy twenty years ago, but it doesn't apply now since ESPN is the first to jump on an athlete for almost anything, instead it appears weak.
When the Super Bowl winning QB is charged with sexual assault, even in a civil trial, that's news. As long as it is reported fairly and without bias it should be available to the public.
Are you telling me twelve stories about Brett Favre working out at a high school are bigger than Big Ben being sued for sexual assault?
Floyd Mayweather owes the IRS -- that is reported. T.O. can't find a house in Buffalo because neighbors don't like him -- that is a story. Former athletes going bankrupt -- front page story. If a player sniffs a steroid the Outside the Lines crews are in front of his house. Pacman Jones at a strip club throwing money around in a case that he was never charged -- huge story.
But not Ben Roethlisberger?
I don't care about the technicalities; the woman is alleging, in no uncertain terms, that Ben Roethlisberger raped her and there's not a whisper from the World Wide Leader in Sports? Regardless of the policy only the naive would believe that ESPN would not have reported this story if the name was Terrell Owens and not Ben Roethlisberger.
One of the reasons a lot of people are turned off by ESPN is the perception they protect certain players, coaches and teams. I honestly do not believe it is a racial issue, I just believe they slurp the bath water of certain individuals and it is very annoying.
It makes no sense that every other news/sports organization in the U.S. has this story and the #1 Sports Network does not.
The only person happy about that is Ben Roethlisberger.
O RLY? Who wrote this back in July?
ESPN Is Like Madonna
CLICK TO REACT
ESPN is like Madonna. Back in the day they were both hip -- you felt like you were connected to them on a personal level. Thirty years later they are talking with strange accents and disconnected from the general public. The Worldwide Leader in Sports has proven this disconnection once again in their coverage of Ben Roethlisberger's sexual assault case.
The explanation I got was that ESPN does not report on civil cases that don't have criminal complaints. I was told that the policy has been in effect for twenty years and, since the plaintiff did not file a criminal complaint, it was a "non-story." They sent out a memo that stated that no one in the company could talk about the story.
It may have been a good policy twenty years ago, but it doesn't apply now since ESPN is the first to jump on an athlete for almost anything, instead it appears weak.
When the Super Bowl winning QB is charged with sexual assault, even in a civil trial, that's news. As long as it is reported fairly and without bias it should be available to the public.
Are you telling me twelve stories about Brett Favre working out at a high school are bigger than Big Ben being sued for sexual assault?
Floyd Mayweather owes the IRS -- that is reported. T.O. can't find a house in Buffalo because neighbors don't like him -- that is a story. Former athletes going bankrupt -- front page story. If a player sniffs a steroid the Outside the Lines crews are in front of his house. Pacman Jones at a strip club throwing money around in a case that he was never charged -- huge story.
But not Ben Roethlisberger?
I don't care about the technicalities; the woman is alleging, in no uncertain terms, that Ben Roethlisberger raped her and there's not a whisper from the World Wide Leader in Sports? Regardless of the policy only the naive would believe that ESPN would not have reported this story if the name was Terrell Owens and not Ben Roethlisberger.
One of the reasons a lot of people are turned off by ESPN is the perception they protect certain players, coaches and teams. I honestly do not believe it is a racial issue, I just believe they slurp the bath water of certain individuals and it is very annoying.
It makes no sense that every other news/sports organization in the U.S. has this story and the #1 Sports Network does not.
The only person happy about that is Ben Roethlisberger.
exactly. Yet they were on that Kobe situation a few yrs back.
O RLY? Who wrote this back in July?
ESPN Is Like Madonna
CLICK TO REACT
ESPN is like Madonna. Back in the day they were both hip -- you felt like you were connected to them on a personal level. Thirty years later they are talking with strange accents and disconnected from the general public. The Worldwide Leader in Sports has proven this disconnection once again in their coverage of Ben Roethlisberger's sexual assault case.
The explanation I got was that ESPN does not report on civil cases that don't have criminal complaints. I was told that the policy has been in effect for twenty years and, since the plaintiff did not file a criminal complaint, it was a "non-story." They sent out a memo that stated that no one in the company could talk about the story.
It may have been a good policy twenty years ago, but it doesn't apply now since ESPN is the first to jump on an athlete for almost anything, instead it appears weak.
When the Super Bowl winning QB is charged with sexual assault, even in a civil trial, that's news. As long as it is reported fairly and without bias it should be available to the public.
Are you telling me twelve stories about Brett Favre working out at a high school are bigger than Big Ben being sued for sexual assault?
Floyd Mayweather owes the IRS -- that is reported. T.O. can't find a house in Buffalo because neighbors don't like him -- that is a story. Former athletes going bankrupt -- front page story. If a player sniffs a steroid the Outside the Lines crews are in front of his house. Pacman Jones at a strip club throwing money around in a case that he was never charged -- huge story.
But not Ben Roethlisberger?
I don't care about the technicalities; the woman is alleging, in no uncertain terms, that Ben Roethlisberger raped her and there's not a whisper from the World Wide Leader in Sports? Regardless of the policy only the naive would believe that ESPN would not have reported this story if the name was Terrell Owens and not Ben Roethlisberger.
One of the reasons a lot of people are turned off by ESPN is the perception they protect certain players, coaches and teams. I honestly do not believe it is a racial issue, I just believe they slurp the bath water of certain individuals and it is very annoying.
It makes no sense that every other news/sports organization in the U.S. has this story and the #1 Sports Network does not.
The only person happy about that is Ben Roethlisberger.
Yes but they were reporting on the Michael Irving rape case which is also only civil case during Superbowl week....
pure, unchecked faggotry
O RLY? Who wrote this back in July?
ESPN Is Like Madonna
CLICK TO REACT
ESPN is like Madonna. Back in the day they were both hip -- you felt like you were connected to them on a personal level. Thirty years later they are talking with strange accents and disconnected from the general public. The Worldwide Leader in Sports has proven this disconnection once again in their coverage of Ben Roethlisberger's sexual assault case.
The explanation I got was that ESPN does not report on civil cases that don't have criminal complaints. I was told that the policy has been in effect for twenty years and, since the plaintiff did not file a criminal complaint, it was a "non-story." They sent out a memo that stated that no one in the company could talk about the story.
It may have been a good policy twenty years ago, but it doesn't apply now since ESPN is the first to jump on an athlete for almost anything, instead it appears weak.
When the Super Bowl winning QB is charged with sexual assault, even in a civil trial, that's news. As long as it is reported fairly and without bias it should be available to the public.
Are you telling me twelve stories about Brett Favre working out at a high school are bigger than Big Ben being sued for sexual assault?
Floyd Mayweather owes the IRS -- that is reported. T.O. can't find a house in Buffalo because neighbors don't like him -- that is a story. Former athletes going bankrupt -- front page story. If a player sniffs a steroid the Outside the Lines crews are in front of his house. Pacman Jones at a strip club throwing money around in a case that he was never charged -- huge story.
But not Ben Roethlisberger?
I don't care about the technicalities; the woman is alleging, in no uncertain terms, that Ben Roethlisberger raped her and there's not a whisper from the World Wide Leader in Sports? Regardless of the policy only the naive would believe that ESPN would not have reported this story if the name was Terrell Owens and not Ben Roethlisberger.
One of the reasons a lot of people are turned off by ESPN is the perception they protect certain players, coaches and teams. I honestly do not believe it is a racial issue, I just believe they slurp the bath water of certain individuals and it is very annoying.
It makes no sense that every other news/sports organization in the U.S. has this story and the #1 Sports Network does not.
The only person happy about that is Ben Roethlisberger.
I don't see your point? If anything you made my point that regardless of what people think I am not influenced. If I think something is wrong I call em up..
http://www.tmz.com/2010/02/19/porn-star-mistress-wigs-out-over-tigers-apology/
Porn Star Mistress Wigs Out over Tiger's Apology
Posted Feb 19th 2010 1:10PM by TMZ Staff
Tiger Woods' alleged mistress/definite porn star boo-hooed at a news conference following Tiger's mea culpa ... because she actually believes he should have publicly apologized to her by name today as well.
Tiger Woods
Veronica Siwik-Daniels aka Joslyn James -- star of "MILF Worship 4" and "Top Heavy 4" -- was accompanied by her attorney, Gloria Allred, claiming she "fell in love with Tiger" and that he said he was in love with her as well.
Gloria said Tiger made her quit the porn business because he's "very jealous and could not stand the thought of her being with another man."
And there's this ... Gloria said, "Tiger led her to believe she was the only woman in his life ... other than his wife."
Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2010/02/19/porn-star-mistress-wigs-out-over-tigers-apology/#ixzz0g16pWaDT
Porn Star Mistress Wigs Out over Tiger's Apology
Posted Feb 19th 2010 1:10PM by TMZ Staff
Tiger Woods' alleged mistress/definite porn star boo-hooed at a news conference following Tiger's mea culpa ... because she actually believes he should have publicly apologized to her by name today as well.
Tiger Woods
Veronica Siwik-Daniels aka Joslyn James -- star of "MILF Worship 4" and "Top Heavy 4" -- was accompanied by her attorney, Gloria Allred, claiming she "fell in love with Tiger" and that he said he was in love with her as well.
Gloria said Tiger made her quit the porn business because he's "very jealous and could not stand the thought of her being with another man."
And there's this ... Gloria said, "Tiger led her to believe she was the only woman in his life ... other than his wife."
Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2010/02/19/porn-star-mistress-wigs-out-over-tigers-apology/#ixzz0g16pWaDT
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092857/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092739/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092552/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092000/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part4.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376091895/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part5.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092699/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part6.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376092308/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part7.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/376091352/Tiger.Tamer.XXX.PROPER.DVDRip.XviD-NYMPHO.part8.rar
Similar threads
