Yesterday I gave an interview to a reporter from the Washington Post. It was ostensibly about how technology is changing the way athletes are perceived, but it really ended up just being another round of questioning along the lines of "Why are blogs so mean to these poor athletes?"
Needless to say, I could have been more tactful. I was pretty aggressive about making it clear that I'm not a journalist (which ISN'T a bad thing), and I think at one point I mock-sobbed because millionaire athletes have it so rough, what with people saying mean things that hurt their feelings. I'm not really sure. I kinda blacked out.
One of the questions asked was, "What are your standards for moving forward with a story?" And here's your answer: I publish things that I think readers will find interesting or humorous. If I think something's bullshit, I say that I think it's bullshit. If I can't confirm it, I say that I can't confirm it. And if it's a waste of time, I don't publish it.
Take this photo, for example. I don't really know the full story here, but it's devout Christian and Heisman-winning quarterback Tim Tebow, just moments before he SPIKED THE BABY INTO THE CONCRETE! OH THE HUMANITY! YOU MONSTER YOU MONSTER!!!