Challenge Answered:

Yesterday I issued my second challenge using the above photo. I asked that you explain which one of these things is not like the other. Before we get into the details of this photo I first want to say that I don't have any qualms with the men, what they did or didn't do will be judged or has been in the court of law.

The five men in the photo (from right to left) are Isiah Thomas, Shannon Brown, Tony Zendejas, Marvin Harrison, and Ben Roethlisberger. To get to the answer, I must explain first what the men have in common. All of these men are current or former professional athletes with moderate to highly successful careers. In the past year, all have been hit with a civil case and/or criminal complaint. Lastly all of these men, except for one, didn't have a chance to speak up for themselves before ESPN spoke on the matter. The lone athlete that had the chance to confront the allegations was two-time Super Bowl champion Ben Roethlisberger.

Last Friday a lawsuit was filed in Washoe County District Court accusing Roethlisberger of sexually assaulting a woman in July of 2008. Roethlisberger is one of nine defendants listed in the online court docket report. Let me make it clear that I didn't do this challenge because I think Roethlisberger is guilty. However I do take umbrage with ESPN's reporting or lack thereof on the story.

Which didn't happen until Thursday, days after the first news of this case was reported by other sources and was confronted by the NFL and Roger Goodell. On Wednesday the WWL sent this statement to Pro Football Talk:

"We are not reporting the allegations against Ben Roethlisberger because no criminal complaint has been filed. As far as we know, this is a civil lawsuit that Roethlisberger has yet to address publicly."

It took a lot of cajones for ESPN to say this, considering the day before an official statement from his lawyer speaking on behalf of the quarterback was released. How often does ESPN report stories solely from what an agent, lawyer, family member, etc. is saying on behalf of an athlete? Almost daily, and a good amount of the time the person connected to said athlete is speaking for themselves, remember when Darren McFaddens mom said he was going pro. Yeah they reported on that. Yet they gave Roethlisberger and the Steeler PR staff time to gather their composure in an effort to refute the allegations. Something the other athletes weren't lucky enough to receive. Not to mention that ESPN consistently reports on purely civil cases; i.e. the Dallas Cowboys bubble incident, Jurevicius and the Browns, and the NFL anti-trust case.

So why did they give him the benefit and not the others? I have already proven that it's not because they don't report on civil cases. So I googled and one of the answers floating around is that ESPN is protecting Roethlisberger to preserve access to the superstar in what could be a mutually beneficial relationship. Maybe ESPN finally learned it's lesson from the Kobe and Duke Lacrosse case, that every woman with a rape claim may in fact be out for cash or just plain crazy. Maybe its Racism, or a mild tinge of racism.

Whatever the reason, only ESPN knows why they issued a "Do Not Report" alert. And all I know is that if ESPN wants to retain its journalistic integrity, it needs to treat each case with the same tactics. Whether it is waiting until all the information comes out, completely ignoring the story, or covering it with a 24/7 news cycle like they did with most of the cases mentioned; they need to treat each story the same. If not, they will continue to show us their biases toward specific teams and players while also showing us they have lost all remnants of any righteousness they once held.