ADVERTISEMENT

Holy crap - just saw a bombshell on Mineo’s feed

Not to kink shame anyone but wouldn't it be better for everyone if I was?
 
tikk10 said:
Damn, I disappear from the internet for a day and all hell breaks loose. Sorry everyone, I'll try to tighten up on my end.
Click to expand...
Question for our attorney on retainer. Could someone like Mineo be hit with slander or libel when posting inaccurate info about someone on social media? Or are college athletes fair game?
 
Callthestall said:
was inaccurate shouldn't be treated like like a Pulitzer Prize winner fabricating a story. It's a Wrestling Forum, not the Wall Street Journal.

I'm personally more intrigued by how Hildabrant does against Ayala.??
Click to expand...
First, you posted that the WSJ doesn't fabricate stories like a Wrestling Forum as though you believe that's true.
You give the WSJ too much credit.

Second, yes how Drew does against Ayala is a true current drama filled and pertinent question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw
smalls103 said:
it would be a conflict of interest, i suppose, if i told someone information i wasn't supposed to. but when did i do that? enlighten me.
Click to expand...
Not sure, but if you wouldn't mind doing so on this forum I would appreciate it. If not I can give you my email and just shoot me an occasional (weekly) update.

Thanks in advance!
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw
El-Jefe said:
What -- did Young forget to bring egg nog to the family Christmas dinner?
Click to expand...
To be honest, he has been wrestling looking like he wants to tap out.
Let Kennedy have 157, eat 2 meals and finish the year at 174.
 
backdrft76 said:
Question for our attorney on retainer. Could someone like Mineo be hit with slander or libel when posting inaccurate info about someone on social media? Or are college athletes fair game?
Click to expand...
Mineo is an irresponsible pot-stirrer operating ostensibly as a journalist without any of the journalism, nor the ethics that lend credibility to journalism, institutionally speaking. He appears to function only to break news and scoop actual journalists (including Willie, who, despite past statements to the contrary, is one). In journalism, there always exists a tension between being first and getting the story right. His only motivation, from what I can tell, is personal brand-building and name recognition.

Consequently, he doesn't feel the same tension actual journalists. Getting it right would be nice, he's probably admit, and often enough rumors turn out to be true, but being first is far more important to him, and given that he answers to no employer, there's never any blowback when he's wrong, which occurs frequently. Why wrestlers and coaches talk to him, I don't know, but it's rarely in their best interests because, again, he's wholly disinterested in getting the story right, he's just looking for clicks.

So to the extent a legal question ever emerges as to whether Mineo is a journalist deserving of first amendment protections typically afforded journalists, I'd imagine most courts would conclude that he isn't. But that probably won't matter. I bring it up because it somewhat relates and I can imagine scenarios where it could one day matter, and because it interests me.

That said, defamation is a high bar, especially in the US, and I don't see where he's ever approached it. Very generally, defamation is (1) a false statement of fact published or told to a third party that (2) the speaker knows to be false or has good reason to believe was false (depending on the notoriety of the plaintiff, there's a shifting standard between negligence and having actual knowledge--famous people are harder to defame); and (3) reputational damages can be shown. Some defamation ("defamation per se") is considered so categorically bad that damages can be presumed, like when you accuse someone of, say, child molestation.

So let's say Kemerer sues Mineo for defamation, the question would become whether Mineo's statement was a false statement of fact. Let's say we can check that box. The question then becomes what Mineo knew at the time he posted. I imagine this would be tough to demonstrate because it would rely on testimony of Mineo and possibly others he's spoken with. I'll speculate that Mineo didn't spin it from whole cloth, that it resulted from some conversation he'd had with someone.

At this point Mineo could also move to dismiss predicated on a first amendment defense, but as I pointed out above, it would be weak because a court would, upon reviewing his well-documented history of failing to ascertain the accuracy of the things he posts, conclude that he's just some idiot on the internet and not actually a journalist deserving of first amendment protection.

But again, that probably doesn't matter because at the end of the day, the statement that Kemerer was done for the year when he actually wasn't, likely caused no reputational harm to Kemerer, and Kemerer would have a steep uphill climb to demonstrate as much. The wrestling community was faked out for a second, Kemerer cleared things up. No jobs were lost, no one thinks worse of Kemerer, and that's that. The presence of NIL deals could possibly change the analysis somewhat because a lost deal as a result of a false statement of fact would be easier to show and, more importantly, quantify in dollars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7brwnpsu, PSU James, Reslo and 10 others
tikk10 said:
Mineo is an irresponsible pot-stirrer operating ostensibly as a journalist without any of the journalism, nor the ethics that lend credibility to journalism, institutionally speaking. He appears to function only to break news and scoop actual journalists (including Willie, who, despite past statements to the contrary, is one). In journalism, there always exists a tension between being first and getting the story right. His only motivation, from what I can tell, is personal brand-building and name recognition.

Consequently, he doesn't feel the same tension actual journalists. Getting it right would be nice, he's probably admit, and often enough rumors turn out to be true, but being first is far more important to him, and given that he answers to no employer, there's never any blowback when he's wrong, which occurs frequently. Why wrestlers and coaches talk to him, I don't know, but it's rarely in their best interests because, again, he's wholly disinterested in getting the story right, he's just looking for clicks.

So to the extent a legal question ever emerges as to whether Mineo is a journalist deserving of first amendment protections typically afforded journalists, I'd imagine most courts would conclude that he isn't. But that probably won't matter. I bring it up because it somewhat relates and I can imagine scenarios where it could one day matter, and because it interests me.

That said, defamation is a high bar, especially in the US, and I don't see where he's ever approached it. Very generally, defamation is (1) a false statement of fact published or told to a third party that (2) the speaker knows to be false or has good reason to believe was false (depending on the notoriety of the plaintiff, there's a shifting standard between negligence and having actual knowledge--famous people are harder to defame); and (3) reputational damages can be shown. Some defamation ("defamation per se") is considered so categorically bad that damages can be presumed, like when you accuse someone of, say, child molestation.

So let's say Kemerer sues Mineo for defamation, the question would become whether Mineo's statement was a false statement of fact. Let's say we can check that box. The question then becomes what Mineo knew at the time he posted. I imagine this would be tough to demonstrate because it would rely on testimony of Mineo and possibly others he's spoken with. I'll speculate that Mineo didn't spin it from whole cloth, that it resulted from some conversation he'd had with someone.

At this point Mineo could also move to dismiss predicated on a first amendment defense, but as I pointed out above, it would be weak because a court would, upon reviewing his well-documented history of failing to ascertain the accuracy of the things he posts, conclude that he's just some idiot on the internet and not actually a journalist deserving of first amendment protection.

But again, that probably doesn't matter because at the end of the day, the statement that Kemerer was done for the year when he actually wasn't, likely caused no reputational harm to Kemerer, and Kemerer would have a steep uphill climb to demonstrate as much. The wrestling community was faked out for a second, Kemerer cleared things up. No jobs were lost, no one thinks worse of Kemerer, and that's that. The presence of NIL deals could possibly change the analysis somewhat because a lost deal as a result of a false statement of fact would be easier to show and, more importantly, quantify in dollars.
Click to expand...
Pro Bono!
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikk10
tikk10 said:
Mineo is an irresponsible pot-stirrer operating ostensibly as a journalist without any of the journalism, nor the ethics that lend credibility to journalism, institutionally speaking. He appears to function only to break news and scoop actual journalists (including Willie, who, despite past statements to the contrary, is one). In journalism, there always exists a tension between being first and getting the story right. His only motivation, from what I can tell, is personal brand-building and name recognition.

Consequently, he doesn't feel the same tension actual journalists. Getting it right would be nice, he's probably admit, and often enough rumors turn out to be true, but being first is far more important to him, and given that he answers to no employer, there's never any blowback when he's wrong, which occurs frequently. Why wrestlers and coaches talk to him, I don't know, but it's rarely in their best interests because, again, he's wholly disinterested in getting the story right, he's just looking for clicks.

So to the extent a legal question ever emerges as to whether Mineo is a journalist deserving of first amendment protections typically afforded journalists, I'd imagine most courts would conclude that he isn't. But that probably won't matter. I bring it up because it somewhat relates and I can imagine scenarios where it could one day matter, and because it interests me.

That said, defamation is a high bar, especially in the US, and I don't see where he's ever approached it. Very generally, defamation is (1) a false statement of fact published or told to a third party that (2) the speaker knows to be false or has good reason to believe was false (depending on the notoriety of the plaintiff, there's a shifting standard between negligence and having actual knowledge--famous people are harder to defame); and (3) reputational damages can be shown. Some defamation ("defamation per se") is considered so categorically bad that damages can be presumed, like when you accuse someone of, say, child molestation.

So let's say Kemerer sues Mineo for defamation, the question would become whether Mineo's statement was a false statement of fact. Let's say we can check that box. The question then becomes what Mineo knew at the time he posted. I imagine this would be tough to demonstrate because it would rely on testimony of Mineo and possibly others he's spoken with. I'll speculate that Mineo didn't spin it from whole cloth, that it resulted from some conversation he'd had with someone.

At this point Mineo could also move to dismiss predicated on a first amendment defense, but as I pointed out above, it would be weak because a court would, upon reviewing his well-documented history of failing to ascertain the accuracy of the things he posts, conclude that he's just some idiot on the internet and not actually a journalist deserving of first amendment protection.

But again, that probably doesn't matter because at the end of the day, the statement that Kemerer was done for the year when he actually wasn't, likely caused no reputational harm to Kemerer, and Kemerer would have a steep uphill climb to demonstrate as much. The wrestling community was faked out for a second, Kemerer cleared things up. No jobs were lost, no one thinks worse of Kemerer, and that's that. The presence of NIL deals could possibly change the analysis somewhat because a lost deal as a result of a false statement of fact would be easier to show and, more importantly, quantify in dollars.
Click to expand...

Well similar to the post I just made, off the top of my head the closest I can think of is I believe Mineo did claim that Northwestern Coaches were blocking Carter Young's transfer which pretty sure was not true and I'd think could argue could cause damage. But like you said I don't think he knows these things to be false, he's just often not sure and is guessing.
 
nitlion6 said:
First, you posted that the WSJ doesn't fabricate stories like a Wrestling Forum as though you believe that's true.
You give the WSJ too much credit.

Second, yes how Drew does against Ayala is a true current drama filled and pertinent question.
Click to expand...
I was trying to say that this is a wrestling forum and if someone was incorrect with a rumor or thought it shouldn't be treated with the constant disdain.
I wouldn't want someone fabricating untruths but if someone heard about an issue and posted which he or she thought was valid and it turned out wrong ,no harm no foul. It's wrestling forum.
Can Hildabrant hang with Ayala?
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw
tikk10 said:
Mineo is an irresponsible pot-stirrer operating ostensibly as a journalist without any of the journalism, nor the ethics that lend credibility to journalism, institutionally speaking. He appears to function only to break news and scoop actual journalists (including Willie, who, despite past statements to the contrary, is one). In journalism, there always exists a tension between being first and getting the story right. His only motivation, from what I can tell, is personal brand-building and name recognition.

Consequently, he doesn't feel the same tension actual journalists. Getting it right would be nice, he's probably admit, and often enough rumors turn out to be true, but being first is far more important to him, and given that he answers to no employer, there's never any blowback when he's wrong, which occurs frequently. Why wrestlers and coaches talk to him, I don't know, but it's rarely in their best interests because, again, he's wholly disinterested in getting the story right, he's just looking for clicks.

So to the extent a legal question ever emerges as to whether Mineo is a journalist deserving of first amendment protections typically afforded journalists, I'd imagine most courts would conclude that he isn't. But that probably won't matter. I bring it up because it somewhat relates and I can imagine scenarios where it could one day matter, and because it interests me.

That said, defamation is a high bar, especially in the US, and I don't see where he's ever approached it. Very generally, defamation is (1) a false statement of fact published or told to a third party that (2) the speaker knows to be false or has good reason to believe was false (depending on the notoriety of the plaintiff, there's a shifting standard between negligence and having actual knowledge--famous people are harder to defame); and (3) reputational damages can be shown. Some defamation ("defamation per se") is considered so categorically bad that damages can be presumed, like when you accuse someone of, say, child molestation.

So let's say Kemerer sues Mineo for defamation, the question would become whether Mineo's statement was a false statement of fact. Let's say we can check that box. The question then becomes what Mineo knew at the time he posted. I imagine this would be tough to demonstrate because it would rely on testimony of Mineo and possibly others he's spoken with. I'll speculate that Mineo didn't spin it from whole cloth, that it resulted from some conversation he'd had with someone.

At this point Mineo could also move to dismiss predicated on a first amendment defense, but as I pointed out above, it would be weak because a court would, upon reviewing his well-documented history of failing to ascertain the accuracy of the things he posts, conclude that he's just some idiot on the internet and not actually a journalist deserving of first amendment protection.

But again, that probably doesn't matter because at the end of the day, the statement that Kemerer was done for the year when he actually wasn't, likely caused no reputational harm to Kemerer, and Kemerer would have a steep uphill climb to demonstrate as much. The wrestling community was faked out for a second, Kemerer cleared things up. No jobs were lost, no one thinks worse of Kemerer, and that's that. The presence of NIL deals could possibly change the analysis somewhat because a lost deal as a result of a false statement of fact would be easier to show and, more importantly, quantify in dollars.
Click to expand...
Counter:

Mineo: "Kemerer has fallen and he can't get up."

Kemerer: "That's not true."

Life Alert: In which case, no NIL deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw and tikk10
tikk10 said:
… That said, defamation is a high bar, especially in the US … Very generally, defamation is (1) a false statement of fact published or told to a third party that (2) the speaker knows to be false or has good reason to believe was false …
Click to expand...
I wonder whether Corby can be found to have defamed Willie. Right off the top, he did not claim to know that Willie was Mineo’s snitch. He just said he heard it. Can a false statement of fact be so simply hidden inside a true wrapper of “I heard that …”? That seems too easy! (I would guess that the “I heard that …” cannot be 100% effective at shielding a false statement inside a trivially true wrapper.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw
1032004 said:
Well similar to the post I just made, off the top of my head the closest I can think of is I believe Mineo did claim that Northwestern Coaches were blocking Carter Young's transfer which pretty sure was not true and I'd think could argue could cause damage. But like you said I don't think he knows these things to be false, he's just often not sure and is guessing.
Click to expand...
I don't recall that example but while that does move the ball nearer to the goal line, I imagine damages would still be difficult to show. Damages for defamation, if not presumed, are really hard to show. It usually requires something quantifiable like being fired from a job, where you could then reference the salary. To the extent NW coaches may have missed out on a recruit who read that and decided to go somewhere else, even that requires speculation and inferences. Maybe an affidavit from the lost recruit, but why would they even want to get involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogwelder and danoftw
Dogwelder said:
I wonder whether Corby can be found to have defamed Willie. Right off the top, he did not claim to know that Willie was Mineo’s snitch. He just said he heard it. Can a false statement of fact be so simply hidden inside a true wrapper of “I heard that …”? That seems too easy! (I would guess that the “I heard that …” cannot be 100% effective at shielding a false statement inside a trivially true wrapper.)
Click to expand...
A repeater/republisher of a defamatory statement is equally liable as the original speaker. But as you drift further from the original source, the subsequent speakers' states of mind can change and defense's as to actual knowledge become more plausible. So it's fact contingent. But if both speakers were similarly situated in terms of knowledge or what they should've known, they're equally liable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogwelder
I appreciate it diverse set of skills and expertise on this board. It adds spice to our discussions.

That said, noone is suing anyone over this kind of stuff, its trivial.

I suspect Mineo has a source on or close to the team who revealed 'something' re: Kem, even if only a rumor. I doubt Mineo just made it up out of whole cloth, despite his spotty track record. Kem may not be packing it up for the year, i.e. a formal announcement, but his return certainly seems in question as well. I will believe the alternative when I see him step on the mat, which may or may not happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lyons212, bourbon n blues and danoftw
I won’t be the coach of Alabama

man. Yinz need to lighten up. Football has tons of insiders and the info is great. Sometimes wrong , sure ; things are fluid and change daily. Read as a possibility and move on.
Everyone one here. No way nick will leave penn state. It was true. Same with lee.
 
Sorry to hear Spencer is out. The timing is just so odd. Wonder why he didn't get this done at the end of last season. Hoping for a full recovery.
 
johnstownsteel said:
Dickish question I know but if Iowa loses the title this year, do you or do you not use it as an excuse if you were and Iowa fan?
Click to expand...
Iowa isn't going to lose the title. Penn State is going to outwrestle everybody else and win it!

Despite the answers you get, PSU could win by 40 with Hildebrandt scoring 15 points and HR will lament the loss of Spencer as the reason why the could not beat PSU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Str8DBLz
nitlion6 said:
Iowa isn't going to lose the title. Penn State is going to outwrestle everybody else and win it!

Despite the answers you get, PSU could win by 40 with Hildebrandt scoring 15 points and HR will lament the loss of Spencer as the reason why the could not beat PSU.
Click to expand...
I think I made it clear the past 6 months or so that PSU would win it so I agree that losing Spencer while terrible, won’t be the reason they lose. I’m more curious how many of them will have the balls to use it as an excuse considering Spencer said “Excuses are for wusses” and we heard about it all offseason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw and nitlion6
johnstownsteel said:
I think I made it clear the past 6 months or so that PSU would win it so I agree that losing Spencer while terrible, won’t be the reason they lose. I’m more curious how many of them will have the balls to use it as an excuse considering Spencer said “Excuses are for wusses” and we heard about it all offseason.
Click to expand...
You already know the answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danoftw, Str8DBLz and Cali_Nittany
I agree we were going to win it going away pre-Spencer announcement. I think we have a good shot at 3-4 champs again, granted maybe a new face in that mix.

Iowa seems flat at several weights, Eireman has had to 'Riddler' his way out of several would be bad losses, they are seeing challenges with Young, Murrin, and Warner... I think Marinelli's best days are behind him. Being the oldest team in the country is turning out to be not necessarily a good thing. I am sure they will fight with Spencer out, but in the end that one ripped their souls out.

I think the inclusion of the Ivy teams brings Iowa's point total down more than ours as well.

Now watch Suriano punt for a year to wait and get Spencer. Michigan looks like a real threat for #2 but I would like to see their oldsters prove it first as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mvattivo

Willie's Crystal Ball Predictions

Replies
116
Views
11K
The Wrestling Room
SpikingWhamos
S
D

Watching these anti-Israel protests in multiple American cities.....

Replies
14
Views
220
Current Events Board
rll1957
R
M

I was threatened by the January 6 committee into staying silent, Trump's acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller claims

Replies
2
Views
132
Current Events Board
m.knox
M
Richie O

Taking any / all questions about PSU for our next podcast!

Replies
13
Views
1K
The Wrestling Room
Cstroke
Cstroke
backdrft76

Match Thread 2024 Big Ten Tournament match, PBP, and discussion thread

Replies
714
Views
96K
The Wrestling Room
mcpat
mcpat
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back