Is any public figure, major or minor, entitled to a shred of privacy in our nutty modern age? The New York Sun’s Tim Marchman correctly pointed out the scrutiny recently foisted upon Alex Rodriguez is no different to degree of stalkerazzi pressure regularly faced by entertainers and politicians. But what might be reasonable treatment for a $252 million professional athlete is slightly different from how a thinking person might tackle the case of a high school track and field starlet.
That is, unless the thinker in question is With Leather’s Matt Ufford, who earlier this week received national coverage when his dubious decision to get all publicly drooly over pole vaulter Allison Stokke resulted in a largish piece in the Washington Post.
The reliably despicable Will Leitch, naturally, sided with Ufford, bemoaning his colleague’s status as “the blogger whack-a-mole.”
“Without question, though, giving an huge interview to The Washington Post about how you can’t stand everyone talking about your daughter — and including two more attractive pictures — is really the perfect way to get everyone to stop talking about your daughter,” giggled Leitch, though anyone who actually read the piece could tell you the pair of quotes attributed to Ms. Stokke’s dad hardly constitute a “huge interview”, nor is there any evidence on hand the aggrieved father solicited the press coverage.
(You’d think — by the way — Will would have a tad more sympathy for someone upset at the public being encouraged to objectify a loved one. I mean, some deranged individual subjected a person close to Leitch to equally creepy abuse, albeit not so widely read.)
If Leitch’s reaction was somewhat unsophisticated, Ufford’s take is nothing short of retarded. And apologies in advance if you or someone you know is retarded.
Lacking even the stones to admit his interests begin and end with generating traffic in the most craven fashion (“I wish Miss Stokke the best in her sporting endeavours. I would love to care about pole vaulting.”), Ufford ended his Wednesday post on the controversy by linking to a pair of stories about Stokke’s defense attorney dad ; the first in which Al Stokke represented a female school teacher accused of sexually assaulting an 11 year old boy, the second concerning Stokke’s defense of a police officer charged with ejaculating on an exotic dancer. OK — at a traffic stop.
“To the Stokkes: if you’d like this post removed, please just contact me,” sneered Ufford. “You don’t have to be mean or anything. We all have jobs that can get ugly, but that doesn’t make us bad people.”
Hoo ha. Here’s a mindblowing concept for Matt and his knuckle-dragging apologists to suck on for a minute or two : even persons who are guilty of the most heinous crimes are entitled to the most competent defense available. And if Al Stokke wasn’t using every legal tactic at his disposal, he’d be doing his clients an unconscionable disservice. Who knows? Perhaps in a few years time, the political/social climate takes a turn for the twisted and the editor of an alleged comedy/sports blog is brought up on charges that circulating titillating photographs of high school girls violates the law? That would certainly be a ridiculous scenario, but not the most farfetched. And if such a day arrives, I’m hopeful Matt Ufford will be able to secure the services of a defender just as determined as Al Stokke.
Likewise, it’s totally pathetic to infer, however slightly, that Stokke should be precluded from protesting on Allison’s behalf merely because he’s…hold on…a lawyer. But again, the Post story wasn’t really about the dad. Ufford says of the Stokke family, “their PR tactics seem counterintuitive,” but I beg to differ. The one quote from Salow’s piece that should’ve resonated with anyone with half a conscience was Allison insisting œI worked so hard for pole vaulting and all this other stuff, and it™s almost like that doesn™t matter. Nobody sees that. Nobody really sees me.
Try laughing that one away, assholes. I’m sure the traffic was through the roof this week and that’s all that really matters.
Thank you for this post–I’m relieved to finally hear a voice of reason in the lately Neanderthal sports blogosphere. I’m a girl who reads several sports blogs, and because the vast majority are written and run by men (with the exception of Ladies…), I accept that there will be a certain amount of hot chick ogling. However: until now, I have seen sports bloggers only post pictures of Jessica Biel, Gisele, Reggie Bush’s girlfriend Kim whoever–women who are PUBLIC figures and make a living based partly on their beauty.
It is an entirely different situation when you post the picture of an *underage* female athlete and private citizen whose attractiveness was only revealed because of local news features about her accomplishments. There was no excuse for Matt Ufford and his compadres to make her a degraded sexual object, thoroughly removing her identity and personhood.
This controversy revolves around the same issues that got Don Imus into trouble: It was one thing for him to go after Gwen Ifill, a renowned journalist and public figure. But for him to publicly denigrate a girls basketball team, innocent young women who were private citizens and had done nothing to warrant his sexual slurs? Not acceptable.
I read Will Leitch’s post on Deadspin, and when one commenter tried to make the same points that you did here, he/she was shot down and mocked incessantly. Just when you think we’ve made progress in women being treated with equal respect, the ugly truth raises its head. . . .
J –
thanks.
if I can turn off my high & mighty megaphone(y) for a moment or two, I’ve got another thought or two on the subject.
I don’t have any quarrel with hot chick ogling (nor hot cock ogling, for that matter). But I do think context is worth considering. It isn’t like there was nowhere on the internet where one-handed typists could find visual stimuli until sports blogs came along. I just think it’s a tad cynical, lazy and dopey-as-fuck for sports blogs to resort to that kind of thing because they know it works. It isn’t just the acceptable way of doing biz, it’s practically expected.
My hangup is not based on some moral stance. Last autumn, the putz at Diecast Dude went off on Leitch simply because Deadspin shared ownership with Fleshbot. And I don’t have any prob with the latter — it’s genuinely funny, well written, has a real point of view beyond “wow, I’d hit that” and considers the sensibilities of persons other than straight dudes every now and then. (and I do feel just a little bummed out that nobody thought my calling SPORTSbyBROOKS “akin to the Fredricks Of Hollywood catalog narrated by Warner Wolf” was deserving of a some kinda tiny trophy).
I’ve read the Post piece a few times and really didn’t think the Stokke family’s reactions were over the top or hysterical or whatever. It’s disingenious to the max to have a hand in creating this explosion of her net popularity and to then claim, “oh, I’d have taken the photo down if the parents had asked.” Uh, yeah, sorry, I had no idea you might’ve possibly been weirded out at becoming stroke material for millions of strangers. I mean, no idea at all. Who wouldn’t want that?
Either Ufford’s the most naive guy in North America or he’s a gutless sack of shit. Guess which one I’m leaning towards?
The other part that’s mega depressing is all the bloggy commentary suggesting that Stokke should, y’know, loosen up and get ready to cash in on all this. Righy-0, just lay back and enjoy it, baby. (Captain) Cavemen have been doing this kinda thing for centuries and you might as well rename yourself Donna Quixote.
God forbid there’s an 18 year old girl — hot or not — that has loftier goals than a Maxim portfolio.
Ufford’s Maria Sharapova comparison on Fox News was typically lame. if Sharapova chooses to market herself in a particular way, that’s her call. But there’s a world of difference between that and an amateur athlete still in high school. Perhaps Stokke’s the most naive girl in North America for having the temerity to walk around in public in something other than a burka without ending up all over the internet, but I think it sucks there’s nary a shred of empathy for her situation.
And really, you can ponder the “who dropped the bomb first?” discussion between With Leather and Barstool Sports all you want. Yeah, someone else either would’ve done it or already did it. That doesn’t mean it was a particularly witty thing to do. And the hinting that Al Stokke has no credibility just because he’s a criminal defense attorney is about unfair an inference as calling Ufford an accessory to murder just ’cause he served in Iraq.
here’s to spraying some shit on TBL too.
I think that more people are picking up that Stokke’s dad went to the Washington Post for coverage for his cause of protecting his 18 year old daughter, which – with a quick check of Google Maps – is just on the other side of the Mississippi from Orange County. Why didn’t he instead solicit the help of a local (same city, state, or maybe timezone?) paper?
Also, his job is his blog, so what’s wrong with doing what it takes to gain hits? Why do you have ads on your site if you’re so against making a living?
Miggs,
Since you seem like a smart person, would you mind quoting the passage from the article where it states that Stokke’s father solicited the Washington Post coverage?
I don’t think it can be denied this story is of national interest — it isn’t as though With Leather and Barstool Sports are only read by persons within their zip code.
I have no problem with commercial activity, but to borrow a title popularized by Seth Tobcman, you don’t have to fuck people over to survive. What’s wrong with doing what it takes to gain hits? I dunno, maybe Matt can post some pictures of your own family members as wank fodder. That should be a fun enterprise.
I don’t begrudge anyone their right to make a living. It would be nice, however, if they could do so without pandering to Dumbfuck Nation.
Fuck Will Leitch. This reminds me of a perfect example of what a pussy this guy is: his little story about showing up in the studio audience of “Quite Frankly”, hoping to ambush Stephen A. Smith with something embarrassing or confrontational, and then coming up with absolutely nothing when he got to be on camera for the show “Q&A”, and even getting clowned by Smith in the process. Leitch and this other moron (“With Leather?” Why didn’t they just call the site “Sucking Deadspin’s Balls”?) laugh and act tough when posting shit on their websites, but could you imagine if they actually had to confront this girl and hear straight from her about the kind of shit she is afraid of, in large part because of them? You know they wouldn’t even bother making their lame arguments about everything being public in the internet age, etc. They would just grunt like the neanderthals they are; and then no doubt go home and post some pseudo-intellectual defense of their actions on their blogs, to the rapturous reaction of their pseudo-intellectual commenters. And then probably make a “Peyton Manning is gay” joke.
By the way, what on earth does whatever this girl’s dad does for a living have to do with whether this is right and wrong? Do these clowns seriously believe that’s some kind of legitimate justification?
I don’t know about that pseudo-intellectual charge, Mark. I mean, Will is already on record as saying “I’m afraid of politics”.
But now that you mention it, the swill-meisters at Fox News really should’ve had Ms. Stokke on the show alongside Ufford. He could’ve explained to her, face to face , why she’s supposed to be flattered by all this attention.
She is a very physically attractive young woman.
I know I am getting old, b/c my first reaction to seeing her was “Oh, her poor dad.”
His life is not going to get much easier over the next however-long, and she’s going to have to deal with losers as long as she looks like that. Which will be a while, if she’s lucky.
The nice thing about losers in real life–as opposed to the internet–is that they tend to choke up when they actually have to speak.
t-
I have several friends who have had to deal with very real, creepy, and dangerous losers. Being humiliated on the internet certainly doesn’t decrease the odds of a stalker problem.
Hey Matt Ufford, if you happen to be reading this, why don’t you man up, admit you were wrong and apologize?
Also, aren’t you out of the service? Isn’t it about time you got rid of that awful “high and tight”, jarhead haircut? You look like about 5000 other guys coming down from Pendelton to date rape chicks in Pacific Beach, dude.
Comments in my “bulls” blog search inbox this morning from the piece of shit’s readers:
“So I take it this woman from Colorado didn’t appreciate it when a ‘Black M___f___ker cums on your face!’ Well then, that makes two of us.”
“Kobe’s wearing his best ‘I raped a bitch and got away with it’ smile in that picture.”
“*allegedly* rape……
if the bitch is too high/drunk/stupid to spell the word rape then it offically is consentual…..or that is what they guy from the bar last night said to me this morning when he left…..”
Exactly when did pandering to sexual predators become defensible and/or funny?
I vote we declare a moratorium on making fun of anyone’s haircut. At least in the context of this discussion.
HSCS, I hear what you are saying but in the interest of fairness, I think you have to be careful how you characterize all of With Leather’s readers.
wannabe sexual predators seems closer to the mark.
How old is Matt Ufford, anyway?
I mean, what he did– “Hey, everybody, check out this picture of this hot-looking high school chick, heh heh!”– and then being smug about it pretty much puts him on the level of some 25- or 28- year-old dirtbag, cruising the high school parking lot in his Camaro, looking for a date.
Nothing beats reading bitchy sermonizing from a dude who produces GG Allin records.
“I wanna piss on you, I wanna piss on you
You ain’t shit to me, ’cause I’m better than you
I wanna shit on you, and rape your little sister too”
That is some delicious hypocrisy.
BDD,
your wikipedia-scanning skills aside, I think you have me mistaken for Dick Urine. I never “produced” a GG Allin recording.
Though the Bard Of Hooksett, NH was presumably not your chosen Cup O’ Puke, if this is the best defense you can muster for Ufford…well, perhaps you shouldn’t have bothered. Though you could smell him from 4 blocks away, the Geege was an actual artist. Not a blogger, sports journalist, or a would-be comedy writer. Persons likely to embrace his lyrical content as some sort of genuine credo would also be well advised to skip “Hostel II”, “The Sopranos” or major portions of the Old Testament, too.
Matt, on the other hand, isn’t dealing with fiction. I’m amazed that for all of the traffic he generates, no one has offered any real justification for his predictably lunkheaded content besides “he’s trying to make a living.”
one more thing about the late monsieur Allin — I’ve seen a number of his chat show appearances over the years, and not only was he a more memorable guest than Ufford, but he managed to appear on TV without looking like a total douchebag.
Anyhow, if it’s delicious hypocrisy you want, look no further.
if Big Daddy Drew thinks GC’s involvement with GG Allin nearly 2 decades ago (not half as embarrassing as his work with Deee-Lite — look it up!) is something our noble editor ought to live down (or has anything to do with the subject at hand), how about Drew’s older work?
http://drsteuss.tripod.com/
How come that one didn’t get nominated for a Bloggy?
“How come that one didn’t get nominated for a Bloggy?”
Because the Bloggies lacked the vision to reward a site that featured cheap, juvenile humor with nary a single apostrophe. It was light years ahead of its time, I tell you. Only now, with America properly dumbed down, could it flourish.
But I don’t expect you actual artists to understand that.
the thing is, the Geege had more wit in his microscopic penis than Ufford’s demonstrated in his entire body of work. So aside from the analogy being flawed to begin with, there’s also the matter of however damaged Allin’s worldview might’ve been, at least he never publicly singled out some high school kid who might’ve gotten thru her life with a fraction less harrasment. I mean, her sole crime to date, has been what, she was born the same sex as your mom?
And really, the guilt by association stuff is just plain desperate. As a former co-conspirator of GG Allin, I’m somehow precluded from saying With Leather Sucks Donkey Dick? That makes about as much sense as Matt implying Ms. Stokke’s dad is out to lunch just because he represented accused sex offenders. Hey, it’s like being in the Marines — somebody’s got to do it.