Two Female Reporters Banned from attending Mayweather-Pacquiao fight

beating the shit out of women isn't a "personal problem."

Larry M said:

Reporters say their credentials were revoked for Mayweather-Pacquiao.

Rachel Nichols of CNN and Michelle Beadle of ESPN/HBO, along with a male reporter, have apparently had their credentials revoked for the big fight. Speculation is that this action may have been taken by Mayweather's people, possibly because the three reporters have actively reported on Mayweather's alleged history of domestic abuse.

If true, it may seem a petty thing, banning them for reporting on his personal problems.

On the other hand, if you say bad/write bad stuff about me, I'm not going to let you come see me at work.

Apparently, the contracts give the boxers the right to decide who is there to report on the fight.

I'm thinking CNN and ESPN should simply buy tickets for the reporters and let them cover the fight anyway.

Click to expand...

Retaliatory credential yanking is nothing new in sports.

Tickets would be of less use to cover a fight than watching it on tv. They'd be screwed with tickets.

William Haskins said:

beating the shit out of women isn't a "personal problem."

Click to expand...

This.

And regardless, if I work in a venue that is open to both the press and the (paying) public, then someone who has reported on my alleged misdeeds might very well have a right to come to my workplace.

Sounds like a crazy contract thing, however, since boxing matches are being held on private property and arranged by private interests. The time to fix this problem was when the contract was being negotiated, because it's pretty clear that the reason for that clause being included was precisely this.

Disgusting, and it reinforces what a complete scumbag this guy is. Yet another reason to loathe pro sports so far as I'm concerned.

Two Female Reporters Banned from attending Mayweather-Pacquiao fight

Click to expand...

Luckiest reporters in the country.

It's kind of disgusting that we even still have prizefighting.

ETA: Then again, we still enjoy blowing people up. At least the boxers are there voluntarily.

Echoing cornflake that this happens all the time in sports reporting. It's incredibly petty and a large part of the reason so much sports reporting is so crap, because the people who do it are terrified of losing access.

Covering live sporting events and getting the whole interview, press conference stuff requires access. There's a real problem in almost all of the big leagues getting some of the better bloggers basic access to get quotes for the feature pieces they write. Much of the blog writing is a lot more useful and in-depth than the mainstream sports section of your local paper, which is still stuck in an era before YouTube, and just tells everyone what they've already seen in a nice informational tone.

There is very little real disadvantage to not being at the event that a decently talented writer and enterprising reporter can't overcome.

Uh, hold up - why does the title of the thread say "two female reporters banned...?"

It was two women and a man. I clicked thinking there'd been some discriminatory thing, then realized it was just regular credential yanking, but why is that the title of the thread?

It's not the title of the original story, as their sex isn't relevant that I can see.

cornflake said:

Uh, hold up - why does the title of the thread say "two female reporters banned...?"

It was two women and a man. I clicked thinking there'd been some discriminatory thing, then realized it was just regular credential yanking, but why is that the title of the thread?

It's not the title of the original story, as their sex isn't relevant that I can see.

Click to expand...

I was wondering that, too. Does it matter that they were women? Or are they just two reporters who have been critical of him before? ... Or are we assuming that they have been more critical of his domestic abuse because they're women?

cornflake said:

Uh, hold up - why does the title of the thread say "two female reporters banned...?"

It was two women and a man. I clicked thinking there'd been some discriminatory thing, then realized it was just regular credential yanking, but why is that the title of the thread?

It's not the title of the original story, as their sex isn't relevant that I can see.

Click to expand...

This x 2.

My first thought at reading the thread title was, "What, did they think women are too delicate to watch a fight or something?"

Same about the title.

And if two people want to beat each other up (sane, adult, and consenting) and other people want to waste their money betting on it, what do I care? Better than dog fighting.

vsrenard said:

Same about the title.

And if two people want to beat each other up (sane, adult, and consenting) and other people want to waste their money betting on it, what do I care? Better than dog fighting.

Click to expand...

There's something deeply wrong with a society where two people beating each other to a pulp is considered entertainment, while two people taking off their clothes and doing pleasurable things to each other is considered obscene; where those who watch the former are considered sports enthusiasts and those who prefer to watch the latter are considered perverts.

Don said:

There's something deeply wrong with a society where two people beating each other to a pulp is considered entertainment, while two people taking off their clothes and doing pleasurable things to each other is considered obscene; where those who watch the former are considered sports enthusiasts and those who prefer to watch the latter are considered perverts.

Click to expand...

I don't think this is really true anymore. At all.

Celia Cyanide said:

I don't think this is really true anymore. At all.

Click to expand...

Quite likely in the subculture you inhabit. Go on down to the Elks Club and try to sell it, though. Or anywhere in the bible belt. For that matter, sell it to the MPAA. Even the MPAA would disagree. The level of violence allowed in movies is much higher than the level of pleasure for an equivalent rating.

heza said:

I was wondering that, too. Does it matter that they were women? Or are they just two reporters who have been critical of him before? ... Or are we assuming that they have been more critical of his domestic abuse because they're women?

Click to expand...

Yeah, my first thought when I saw the article was that it would be like those cases where women weren't supposed to be sportscasters, because they weren't allowed into the player's locker rooms.

Don said:

Quite likely in the subculture you inhabit. Go on down to the Elks Club and try to sell it, though. Or anywhere in the bible belt. For that matter, sell it to the MPAA. Even the MPAA would disagree. The level of violence allowed in movies is much higher than the level of pleasure for an equivalent rating.

Click to expand...

This is true. You can have people shooting one another and beating one another up, even a certain amount of blood and gore, and a film will be PG-13. But one incident of frontal nudity (or an F bomb) and it's an R (in the US).

Don said:

There's something deeply wrong with a society where two people beating each other to a pulp is considered entertainment, while two people taking off their clothes and doing pleasurable things to each other is considered obscene; where those who watch the former are considered sports enthusiasts and those who prefer to watch the latter are considered perverts.

Click to expand...

It is pretty fucking weird.

Zoombie said:

It is pretty fucking weird.

Click to expand...

There honestly wasn't as much beating going on as people think, Mayweather basically ran around to keep out of range and hugged him when he couldn't. It won him the fight though, despite people grumbling about it and how it was rigged.

Don said:

There's something deeply wrong with a society where two people beating each other to a pulp is considered entertainment, while two people taking off their clothes and doing pleasurable things to each other is considered obscene; where those who watch the former are considered sports enthusiasts and those who prefer to watch the latter are considered perverts.

Click to expand...

Maybe one day we can have a society where televised entertainment consists of two people who take off their clothes and beat each other for pleasure...

MarkEsq said:

Maybe one day we can have a society where televised entertainment consists of two people who take off their clothes and beat each other for pleasure...

Click to expand...

Well, it's not televised, and it's only topless, but these may be the droids you're looking for.

NSFW!

MarkEsq said:

Maybe one day we can have a society where televised entertainment consists of two people who take off their clothes and beat each other for pleasure...

Click to expand...

Fifty Shades of Grey... the utopian dream.