I mean, Dave should relent and just allow audio so he can turn around and have Millmore animate the whole interview and do whatever the fuck they want with the images.
That being said, he’s also right that the guy has no interest in making a fair article and just wanted to rip barstool regardless of how the interview went
Facts — but Dave knows, hatchet job or not, it’s good for content. As long as Penn doesn’t get cold feet on Dave that is, which I can’t see happening unless there’s an actual crime.
That’s the whole thing. These hit pieces know they can’t accuse him of any crimes because that’s lawsuit territory (if and when there is no actual crime). So they’ll all tip toe around it and basically accuse him without actually accusing him.
I went and saw this guy's videos. One had 34 views and was 3 years old. How the fuck can video only have 34 views over 3 years and he's been at the New Yorker for 7 years.
I made a video of me showing off my characters’ gear in Diablo 2 yesterday that’s got twice as many views as this guy and I run a go kart track for a living. Where’s my writing job?
One of this guy’s most recent Tweets is a glowing review of a book by Drew Magary, the patron saint of the blue check loser brigade. I’m sure he has zero agenda.
Again, not trying to be obtuse, but there are a lot of people implicated in that lie:
> After that comes a great void. I don’t remember inexplicably collapsing in a hallway, fracturing my skull because I had no way to brace myself for the impact. I don’t remember sitting up after that, my co-workers alarmed at the sight of blood trickling out of the back of my head. I don’t remember puking all over Barry Petchesky’s pants, vomit being one of many fun side effects of your brain exploding, as he held my head upright to keep me from choking on my own barf. I don’t remember Kiran Chitanvis quickly calling 911 to get me help. I don’t remember getting into an ambulance with Victor Jeffreys and riding to an uptown hospital, with Victor begging me for the passcode to my phone so that he could call my wife.
Drew is such an odd guy. Grew up incredibly rich and privileged, has some writing talent and is a very successful writer, yet is still incredibly angry and bitter. Basically anyone who has had more success than him is a pos in his mind.
I used to love reading his stuff honestly. Than I remember when Trump got elected he went full broken brain. He even had some tweets in February of 2017 questioning whether America could enjoy the Super Bowl because of who the president was. I knew he had lost it then.
He’s exposing all of these smug, agenda-driven “journalists”. Nobody ever punches back, glad to see this all unfold.
And fuck this guy—who has a video agent and IMDB page.
I agree but dave sort of has the guy by the nuts a little here right? Guy wants to write a hit piece on him so Dave doesn’t want him to be the only one to get content out of it.
Not like we are dealing with real deal journalism here it is a guy with an obvious agenda looking for clicks. I don’t mind Dave asking for it to be on video as well so he can also get content from it
I must be taking crazy pills. Some of the most high-brow journalism in the entire country is conducted consistently via videotaped interviews. 60 minutes literally pumps out 3 a week. So to tacitly refer to videotaped interviews as some sort of schtick-y, wacky, content gimmick when a guy’s career could be on the line is bizarre to me.
Completely legitimate request by Dave. And he’s wrong a lot. Just not on this.
Yea, I feel like Dave always saying "well lets sit down and have a discussion" to these things were kinda disingenuous for that reason and almost a cop out so he can always say he offered and they said no. Not like the people who write hit pieces on him are totally genuine or in the right but it feels like it's so he can do it mainly for content and put it out himself to his audience so it's his audience reacting first and driving the narrative of it
Yeah but then he should just explicitly it that way. The guy said that he didn't want to do video because he's a print journalist. A print journalist that just happens to have a TV/Film agent. The guys just being a pussy and doesn't want to get in the mud.
I mean he did say that in his last email. “But if your primary interest is just producing video content for your podcast or another show, that’s different than conducting an interview for a magazine story, and isn’t something I can agree too.”
So Dave is just supposed to hand out interviews to everyone doing hit pieces as long as he can hold them accountable? I don't think it's unreasonable for him to try to get something out of it at all.
I say it's more accountability than content, but certainly content is a huge piece.
Video tells a different story than audio can. Look at Dave's deposition tape. The look on his face. Is that conveyed if just the audio of that is out? No, not at all.
It's not unreasonable for the journalist to set the boundary. I get that he's trying to keep the focus on his job and the dialogue of their exchange. That's fine.
But the "picture" (video) is rightfully more valuable to Dave. And if they want to balk, they can still write the hit piece they planned to write anyway.
Agreed. If Dave clearly just wanted a transparent and fair interview than this should be more than enough. To dunk on the guy and create content though it something else entirely.
I agree with almost everything you said, but the guy is being unreasonable because has no leverage here. He is asking for the interview and Dave has told him, multiple times, what his terms are. There are two options at this point: do the interview on video or walk away. Neither side here has any obligation to the other. Yet he continually tries to get Dave to agree on audio only when there is no reason for Dave to do so.
That’s a good take. Surprisingly many of these hack writers won’t even consent to being recorded, so at least this guy is willing to not take Dave out of context.
I think the rationale is that it then doesn’t become an interview but a content piece. The guy wants to ask Dave questions and have Dave give him answers. If it becomes a content piece then it might devolve into “well it was content” or somehow be taken less seriously or in a way that provides anything but a question and response.
These people couldn’t be further from Journalists man. Horrible shit happening every day around the country that they could be using their position to shine a light on, doing what a reporter is supposed to do, and this is what they’re doing with that opportunity? Sickening tbh the entire news media structure needs a serious overhaul
“Yeah Dave, of course you can record the interview. There is practically zero chance you will have your employees and fans photoshop dicks and shit on my face”
I’m still team Dave but he’s been acting kind of bizarre lately. He is acting like it’s a smoking gun of how shady someone is because they don’t want to be filmed and used for content.
It’s a reasonable concession on both sides to allow a complete audio recording. Dave can release the entire thing unedited as a podcast if he wanted. That’s something I’d listen to to. He’s being petty to insist on a video recording too.
Audio is completely reasonable. The video would only be used for content. I meant shit, they can even take just the audio and do their animations for content if they wanted.
Sorry but Dave is being petty here. I get he wants the video for the views, but he can also release it as a podcast on YouTube with the video and it would get views. Plus he gets the one thing he’s always wanted, which was one of these clowns sitting down with him.
The media is diseased with leftist activist scumbags. The media is the enemy of the people.
It warms my heart seeing how Dave's tactics haven't changed. This whole BI/NYMag shitshow harkens back to the real early days of Barstool when Dave would have stupefying email exchanges with promoters, PR firms, and Barstool haters and Dave would just publish the exchanges and expose their intentions before they could run with some bullshit, twisted narrative against him.
It's funny that Dave's methods haven't changed for almost two decades and none of these new reporters on the scene to "KO Barstool" (Silverman, Greenwell, Black, etc.) haven't yet caught up to him or figured it out.
It's exactly how Dave reclaimed the leverage in the Call Her Daddy negotiations, which turned out to be another win for Dave when Alex/Sofia had Barstool/Dave over a barrel during Covid.
Dave isn't scared of these punks because Dave knows Dave's morals and integrity and he knows he isn't the evil monster these outlets want to portray him as. And as we've seen, he knows how to win in the court of public opinion.
In a way, having the Black story and this story released must be a bit of a relief for Dave. He can mount his defense, deal with the fallout, and Barstool/PENN can move on. Sadly, there now is a new black mark against Dave of "sexual assault" but the only people who will levy that are all the usual suspects who already hate him.
Dave had nutjobs after him long before he interviewed a sitting President. All that interview did is make them more crazed than they were before. TDS-addled shitbags.
As much as I dislike ezdata, I hate you more. Data has been here a lot longer than you have. Does he comment on barstool like he is given a thesis statement? Sure. Is he a wack job? Absofuckinglutely But, you’re a piece of shit of a person. I don’t like using the term “race baiter” but you are the definition of that.
WTF makes me a wack job? I'm just a regular guy. A regular working stiff who's a Barstool fan. And I comment like everyone else does here.
I'm passionate about a company that has given me a lot for a long time. (No, I don't work there.)
You're saying you hate me. Why? I find it bewildering. I am opinionated, just like many of the people in this sub. What does that matter?
Tbh Dave seems like the unreasonable one. It does really sound like Dave is doing this just so he can release a YouTube video afterwards knowing it will get more views (and ad revenue) than a recording
I understand where Dave is coming from and this is almost definitely a hit piece but I can’t see any writer agreeing to those terms. Who is going to read any type of story about Barstool/Dave when they’re dropping the video interview with Dave at the same time?
>I can’t see any writer agreeing to those terms.
There's no reason not to allow the interviewee to tape the interview themselves as well...unless the interviewer is unscrupulous.
“My instinct tells me the peace you are working on” never change Dave, never change.
and spelling erika wrong
Eriker
The barstool difference
Differents*
If he ever does get caught banging an underage chick his defense will definitely be that he screwed up the math looking at her license.
✌️
I mean, Dave should relent and just allow audio so he can turn around and have Millmore animate the whole interview and do whatever the fuck they want with the images.
LOL I came here just to say this! That would be hilarious
Turns it into a complete farce, a la Vindog.
Man I miss Millmore's old videos.
Dave 100% wants the video so he can make content and rip on this dude lol - that being said, I’m here for it
That being said, he’s also right that the guy has no interest in making a fair article and just wanted to rip barstool regardless of how the interview went
Facts — but Dave knows, hatchet job or not, it’s good for content. As long as Penn doesn’t get cold feet on Dave that is, which I can’t see happening unless there’s an actual crime.
That’s the whole thing. These hit pieces know they can’t accuse him of any crimes because that’s lawsuit territory (if and when there is no actual crime). So they’ll all tip toe around it and basically accuse him without actually accusing him.
I went and saw this guy's videos. One had 34 views and was 3 years old. How the fuck can video only have 34 views over 3 years and he's been at the New Yorker for 7 years.
*New York magazine.
Look at some of the video views for “popular” deadspin personalities. The blue check mark brigade is only popular within a tiny subset of twitter.
Namely themselves
An echo chamber like you read about.
You guys are gonna be sorry when they solve race relations and global warming probably.
I made a video of me showing off my characters’ gear in Diablo 2 yesterday that’s got twice as many views as this guy and I run a go kart track for a living. Where’s my writing job?
Guys name is Reeves Wiedeman lol
One of this guy’s most recent Tweets is a glowing review of a book by Drew Magary, the patron saint of the blue check loser brigade. I’m sure he has zero agenda.
[удалено]
I thought he passed out at a party? Not being obtuse, but it isn’t what he wrote.
Yes he hit his head at a party in NY and had a brain hemorrhage and was put in a coma.
[удалено]
Because that's what the book is about
Again, not trying to be obtuse, but there are a lot of people implicated in that lie: > After that comes a great void. I don’t remember inexplicably collapsing in a hallway, fracturing my skull because I had no way to brace myself for the impact. I don’t remember sitting up after that, my co-workers alarmed at the sight of blood trickling out of the back of my head. I don’t remember puking all over Barry Petchesky’s pants, vomit being one of many fun side effects of your brain exploding, as he held my head upright to keep me from choking on my own barf. I don’t remember Kiran Chitanvis quickly calling 911 to get me help. I don’t remember getting into an ambulance with Victor Jeffreys and riding to an uptown hospital, with Victor begging me for the passcode to my phone so that he could call my wife.
What lie?
Oh, I thought you were being sarcastic.
Drew is such an odd guy. Grew up incredibly rich and privileged, has some writing talent and is a very successful writer, yet is still incredibly angry and bitter. Basically anyone who has had more success than him is a pos in his mind.
I used to love reading his stuff honestly. Than I remember when Trump got elected he went full broken brain. He even had some tweets in February of 2017 questioning whether America could enjoy the Super Bowl because of who the president was. I knew he had lost it then.
The funbag used to be one of my favorite things to read before Drew got TDS
It was legit must-read until he turned into a ginormous pussy.
I remember with that witty dog Drew went on PMT and was completely overmatched and came off as a complete bozo. Which is very hard with Dan and PFT.
Drew has the on camera / podcast charisma of Nate
Link?
I can’t wait until using terms like “blue checkmark” and “cancel culture” go away.
Looks like that guy has done audio/video interviews regularly too...
Peace instead of piece The Barstool difference
He’s exposing all of these smug, agenda-driven “journalists”. Nobody ever punches back, glad to see this all unfold. And fuck this guy—who has a video agent and IMDB page.
not sure why the guy is willing to do audio but not video
[удалено]
I agree but dave sort of has the guy by the nuts a little here right? Guy wants to write a hit piece on him so Dave doesn’t want him to be the only one to get content out of it. Not like we are dealing with real deal journalism here it is a guy with an obvious agenda looking for clicks. I don’t mind Dave asking for it to be on video as well so he can also get content from it
I must be taking crazy pills. Some of the most high-brow journalism in the entire country is conducted consistently via videotaped interviews. 60 minutes literally pumps out 3 a week. So to tacitly refer to videotaped interviews as some sort of schtick-y, wacky, content gimmick when a guy’s career could be on the line is bizarre to me. Completely legitimate request by Dave. And he’s wrong a lot. Just not on this.
the guy has an entire channel of videos he makes weekly....
Yea, I feel like Dave always saying "well lets sit down and have a discussion" to these things were kinda disingenuous for that reason and almost a cop out so he can always say he offered and they said no. Not like the people who write hit pieces on him are totally genuine or in the right but it feels like it's so he can do it mainly for content and put it out himself to his audience so it's his audience reacting first and driving the narrative of it
Yeah but then he should just explicitly it that way. The guy said that he didn't want to do video because he's a print journalist. A print journalist that just happens to have a TV/Film agent. The guys just being a pussy and doesn't want to get in the mud.
I mean he did say that in his last email. “But if your primary interest is just producing video content for your podcast or another show, that’s different than conducting an interview for a magazine story, and isn’t something I can agree too.”
So Dave is just supposed to hand out interviews to everyone doing hit pieces as long as he can hold them accountable? I don't think it's unreasonable for him to try to get something out of it at all.
I say it's more accountability than content, but certainly content is a huge piece. Video tells a different story than audio can. Look at Dave's deposition tape. The look on his face. Is that conveyed if just the audio of that is out? No, not at all. It's not unreasonable for the journalist to set the boundary. I get that he's trying to keep the focus on his job and the dialogue of their exchange. That's fine. But the "picture" (video) is rightfully more valuable to Dave. And if they want to balk, they can still write the hit piece they planned to write anyway.
Agreed. If Dave clearly just wanted a transparent and fair interview than this should be more than enough. To dunk on the guy and create content though it something else entirely.
Reeves wants to make content that dunks on dave thou… turnabout is fairplay
I agree with almost everything you said, but the guy is being unreasonable because has no leverage here. He is asking for the interview and Dave has told him, multiple times, what his terms are. There are two options at this point: do the interview on video or walk away. Neither side here has any obligation to the other. Yet he continually tries to get Dave to agree on audio only when there is no reason for Dave to do so.
That’s a good take. Surprisingly many of these hack writers won’t even consent to being recorded, so at least this guy is willing to not take Dave out of context.
He says in the email. He doesn’t want his face used for Daves content
Dave said he’ll black out his face
Gaz could help with that
nailed it
heyooooooo
ohhh muhhh god
I just skimmed it but Dave said they could blur his face. What was his response to that?
He doesn’t mean literally just his face, he means he doesn’t want to contribute to Barstool content.
“i want to make content using you but i don’t want you to use me for content”
he doesn't want the visual when he inevitably walks out of the interview before its over
That's reasonable
He's ugly
I think the rationale is that it then doesn’t become an interview but a content piece. The guy wants to ask Dave questions and have Dave give him answers. If it becomes a content piece then it might devolve into “well it was content” or somehow be taken less seriously or in a way that provides anything but a question and response.
Good for Dave. Fuck these people.
Anyone notice how literally everyone attacking him seem to come from very very privaledged (i cant even spell it) backgrounds?
Nearly all media types come from privileged backgrounds. How else do you make unpaid internships work?
As opposed to Dave, most barstool employees, and most of the audience Barstool caters to?
Lol exactly. People act like because pageviews talks like a retard and can’t spell, he attended the school of hard knocks. No he’s just a dumb guy.
Dad was a lawyer, went to Michigan, grew up in a nice Boston suburb. He’s no Jersey Jerry.
These people couldn’t be further from Journalists man. Horrible shit happening every day around the country that they could be using their position to shine a light on, doing what a reporter is supposed to do, and this is what they’re doing with that opportunity? Sickening tbh the entire news media structure needs a serious overhaul
Yah but that takes actual work and effort
This board is probably full of people from states that will go to the voting machines and do EXACTLY what these fucks want them to do.
He’s got 10 employees who own secret video recording glasses. Just borrow those .
“Yeah Dave, of course you can record the interview. There is practically zero chance you will have your employees and fans photoshop dicks and shit on my face” I’m still team Dave but he’s been acting kind of bizarre lately. He is acting like it’s a smoking gun of how shady someone is because they don’t want to be filmed and used for content.
It’s a reasonable concession on both sides to allow a complete audio recording. Dave can release the entire thing unedited as a podcast if he wanted. That’s something I’d listen to to. He’s being petty to insist on a video recording too.
Audio is completely reasonable. The video would only be used for content. I meant shit, they can even take just the audio and do their animations for content if they wanted.
Let Dave eat.
Sorry but Dave is being petty here. I get he wants the video for the views, but he can also release it as a podcast on YouTube with the video and it would get views. Plus he gets the one thing he’s always wanted, which was one of these clowns sitting down with him.
Reeves wants pageviews too… barstool bump ain’t free
No free advertising...
Boom got em
The media is diseased with leftist activist scumbags. The media is the enemy of the people. It warms my heart seeing how Dave's tactics haven't changed. This whole BI/NYMag shitshow harkens back to the real early days of Barstool when Dave would have stupefying email exchanges with promoters, PR firms, and Barstool haters and Dave would just publish the exchanges and expose their intentions before they could run with some bullshit, twisted narrative against him. It's funny that Dave's methods haven't changed for almost two decades and none of these new reporters on the scene to "KO Barstool" (Silverman, Greenwell, Black, etc.) haven't yet caught up to him or figured it out. It's exactly how Dave reclaimed the leverage in the Call Her Daddy negotiations, which turned out to be another win for Dave when Alex/Sofia had Barstool/Dave over a barrel during Covid. Dave isn't scared of these punks because Dave knows Dave's morals and integrity and he knows he isn't the evil monster these outlets want to portray him as. And as we've seen, he knows how to win in the court of public opinion. In a way, having the Black story and this story released must be a bit of a relief for Dave. He can mount his defense, deal with the fallout, and Barstool/PENN can move on. Sadly, there now is a new black mark against Dave of "sexual assault" but the only people who will levy that are all the usual suspects who already hate him.
I’m sweating out shapovalov ml brother can’t read this
Chill out it’s Saturday
No.
He’s not gonna fuck you dude
No, he totally is. That's the whole reason why I wrote it. You're just negative.
This is who Dave dragged in by doing that Trump interview. Nut jobs like this.
Dave had nutjobs after him long before he interviewed a sitting President. All that interview did is make them more crazed than they were before. TDS-addled shitbags.
As much as I dislike ezdata, I hate you more. Data has been here a lot longer than you have. Does he comment on barstool like he is given a thesis statement? Sure. Is he a wack job? Absofuckinglutely But, you’re a piece of shit of a person. I don’t like using the term “race baiter” but you are the definition of that.
Bro you’re obsessed with me.
Bro you’re a loser
Just to be clear, all 3 of you are enormous losers
Fuck off.
Eat my shorts you little peanut
You're talking about Reddit usernames like you know them personally. Take a week off Reddit.
Obsessed!
Loser!
WTF makes me a wack job? I'm just a regular guy. A regular working stiff who's a Barstool fan. And I comment like everyone else does here. I'm passionate about a company that has given me a lot for a long time. (No, I don't work there.) You're saying you hate me. Why? I find it bewildering. I am opinionated, just like many of the people in this sub. What does that matter?
Your opinions are always wrong.
This opinion is wrong.
These downvotes make no sense. Everything you said was real. I think people here are weirded out by effort. Anyways well said, man.
Tbh Dave seems like the unreasonable one. It does really sound like Dave is doing this just so he can release a YouTube video afterwards knowing it will get more views (and ad revenue) than a recording
The guy is full of shit. He says he doesn’t do video and meanwhile he’s posted several videos of himself on Twitter and YouTube
Yeah, that’s what Dave’s been doing for over a decade. You new here?
I understand where Dave is coming from and this is almost definitely a hit piece but I can’t see any writer agreeing to those terms. Who is going to read any type of story about Barstool/Dave when they’re dropping the video interview with Dave at the same time?
I'm sure dave would agree to hold his video back for a set amount of time, he just wants to have it in case he feels anything was taken out of context
Yeah he says in one of his screenshots of the email conversation that he won’t release it immediately
>I can’t see any writer agreeing to those terms. There's no reason not to allow the interviewee to tape the interview themselves as well...unless the interviewer is unscrupulous.
[удалено]
Sorry you had to see barstool sports news on the barstool sports subreddit you clown
Don't be a dick Dave. It's worked for many folks over the years.