ESPN, suicide and a story I've never told before

I was once assigned to write a feature story on a high profile, nationally known professional athlete who kept getting into trouble. What was wrong with this guy? I talked to former coaches and anyone in his hometown who knew him back when the athlete was in high school.

Through that reporting, I learned a shocking family secret.

The athlete's mother had attempted suicide back around the time he was becoming a local star with a big future. Not only that, but it was the athlete who had actually found his mother following the attempt.

The information may have shed some light on why this athlete had been so troubled. It also turned what was going to be a good feature into a great story.

But before I published it I wanted to find out something about this woman who was not a public figure and was about to have her personal agony exposed. That was a problem because I was not able to interview her. The athlete was refusing all media requests at the time, too.

So I tracked down the brother of the athlete and I asked him the one question I needed an answer to before writing this story:

An NFL coach wants me dead

Anyone who has paid attention to the NFL this season should not be surprised by the Chris Kluwe column posted on Deadspin.com on Thursday. Kluwe described in detail a homophobic coach he claims ended his career as a punter with the Minnesota Vikings.

Clearly, the NFL has taken a step back while the rest of the country moves forward on gay issues. Or maybe the NFL is exactly where it always has been -- to the right of the mainstream with a streak of anti-gay through the core. How else to explain the sudden disappearance from the NFL of gay supporters and at least one athlete in his prime who was rumored to be gay? Just coincidences? Maybe. Maybe not.

Kluwe, a straight ally who was an outspoken supporter of gay marriage in Minnesota, is out of the NFL. So is Brendon Ayanbadejo, another supporter. Both saw their careers abruptly end. Too old? Not good enough? Or too gay-friendly?

What about those football players who were supposedly going to come out before this past season ... until they suddenly crept back into the closet? Or Kerry Rhodes, one of the better defensive backs in the game, who is suddenly out of the NFL after he was rumored to be gay?

And what to make of that bizarre Aaron Rodgers interview recently where he felt obligated to declare "I really, really like women" amid gay rumors?

A fitting postscript to 'The end of a career in journalism'

I received a lot of responses and retweets from yesterday's column on media companies that refuse to pay writers for their work or expertise, and why it would eventually mean the end of my journalism career. It was almost all very supportive and for that, I am grateful.

There was an interesting discussion on sportsjournalists.com -- a site populated by sports journalists, one presumes -- where many argued that the market had simply declared there was no value to our work. That is far too simple an explanation for the massive transformation within the industry, from the horrific decision years ago to give away the product for free to the inevitable decimation of independent media sports staffs that followed and the rise of journo-marketers at stakeholder sites from nfl.com to ESPN.com. There are a lot of reasons why the industry is where it is today and why it is forcing me out.

But perhaps the most telling response to my column came via a personal message that showed up in my Facebook inbox. A radio host named Dennis Michelsen from RaceTalkRadio wrote that he enjoyed my column on media outlets that refuse to pay people for their expertise, but he really liked another one I had written about fewer independent voices in Nascar. He wanted to talk about that column on his radio show and asked me to email him to set up a time for an interview.

I wrote back and asked what he would pay me to appear on his show.

His response: "Guests appear for free on our radio show to publicize their work ..."

The end of a career in journalism

Shortly after I wrote a jersey/slant column last July titled, "Nascar, Kyle Petty and the future of sports coverage," I received an email from an editor of a major metropolitan newspaper's editorial board. He wanted permission to reprint the column for the op-ed page. I responded, in part, with a request for information on the newspaper's compensation rate.

He quickly wrote back that they had chosen a different column instead. I've always wondered if it was because I dared to ask for money.

Not that I would be shocked if that was the reason. I've been asked too many times in my career to provide my work or expertise for free. And I'm hardly alone. Here's Tim Kreider's piece in The New York Times about the absurdity of this surprisingly commonplace practice. It's called "Slaves of the Internet, Unite!"

It would almost be funny if the truth wasn't killing my career.

#StonewallSochi #SingSochi

An athlete boycott of the Sochi Olympics was never going to happen. Let's be clear about that. Yes, Harvey Fierstein's op-ed piece in The New York Times comparing the anti-gay laws and ugly rhetoric in Russia to the anti-Semitic rants of the Nazi's before the 1936 Games was compelling.

As if a compelling argument actually mattered.

We all get what matters: Money. Obscene amounts of money have been made and will be made in these Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia in 2014. And that's why there won't be a national boycott. Money always trumps human dignity. But we already knew that, didn't we?

And hey, the IOC says Russia has assured everyone that it won't arrest athletes or fans during the Games. The real horror, brutality and inhumanity will be saved only for its own citizens. So there's really no need for the world to care or even notice. Move along, people, nothing to see here ...

So what are those of good conscience to do about these Games, which will be held in a frightening country where athletes will try to compete at their best while under the threat of jail or expulsion if they offer a statement of support to the oppressed?

Stakeholder journalism bias, Pete Prisco edition

Is it just me, or did Pete Prisco's CBSSports.com column on the $765 million concussion settlement with players read like an old NFL talking-points memo?

Prisco wrote that NFL players who sustained brain damage from the game shouldn't be compensated for their suffering because they knew what they were getting into when they agreed to play football. Of course, that doesn't mesh with the accusation that the league misled players about the danger of concussions. But that side of the lawsuit somehow wasn't mentioned in Prisco's column.

Look, if Prisco wants to announce to every player in the NFL that they get what they deserve for playing the game and shouldn't receive a dime in disability compensation, that's his prerogative. It's hard to believe players are going to have an ounce of respect for him after that column. But that's his choice.

Nor am I going to suggest Prisco might have brain damage, as Keith Olbermann did in his otherwise expert takedown of Prisco's relative indifference to the hardship and tragedy of former players like Junior Seau, who committed suicide like others who were found to really have brain damage.

I prefer to focus on the most obvious reason why Prisco would write such a conveniently dismissive, pro-NFL column about potentially thousands of irreparably damaged human beings:

ESPN and the pretense of journalistic integrity

Back in December, 2011, The New York Times ran a story about the risk of brain damage for soccer players who frequently head the ball. At the time, I was a contributing writer for espnW.com -- the female-focused ESPN Web site. So I pitched a story, suggesting we ask Abby Wambach and others about the danger.

After all, there had been so much discussion of concussions among football players. Here was an important news story about brain trauma that could impact female athletes as well. Wasn't that exactly what this fledgling sports site would want? I was certain the story would be approved.

But later that very same day, espnW.com featured

A little piece of advice for Caroline Wozniacki

Dear Ms. Wozniacki,

We don't know each other, but as someone who has written about tennis, I feel I am perfectly within my rights to give you advice about your personal life. Even if it's none of my damn business.

I think it's time to say what everyone has been thinking for the last two years. C'mon, we all know what has happened to your game, why you have gone from No. 1 in the rankings in 2011 to No. 10 and without a title this season when you should be at the top of the tennis world.

It's the boyfriend. You spend too much time together. After every tennis tournament, you're off to some golf course to walk 18 holes instead of practicing. How selfish of Rory McIlroy to expect you to care about him and his career. As if he should matter.

Could gay accusation cost Kerry Rhodes NFL job?

The last time NFL free agent safety Kerry Rhodes was asked about his future, he told AL.com earlier in July that he was in the middle of negotiations and a decision on where he would play was coming soon.

"It's in the works," he said. "I can't talk about it in depth but there's a good four teams that I'm looking at. There are ongoing discussions. I'm trying to see which one will be the best fit for me. You will see me, though."

So far, we haven't.

Training camps opened throughout the NFL this week, with all signed veterans arriving by Saturday. Rhodes was not among them.

Maybe it's a negotiating ploy. Maybe Rhodes thinks he can wait until teams evaluate their rosters and possibly get a better deal later. Maybe at 30 he is hoping to skip the rigors of training camp and sign later in preseason.

Or is it possible an accusation that Rhodes is gay is costing him a chance to sign a lucrative contract, perhaps even preventing him from getting a job in the NFL?