"read the banner…most comprehensive," wrote the main contributor to the site, who goes by the name Net Income, pointing the commenter to the banner: "The most comprehensive source for news about the New Jersey Nets."
NetIncome was eager to link earlier this week to an unflattering and thinly-reported article in the Daily News about Atlantic Yards foe Daniel Goldstein, but not, of course, to any of the follow-ups that cast doubt on the original story.
"SCREW HIM!, productively commented Paul Erstein, a Florida-based fan who's one of the few people to sign his name on the blog.
A few readers questioned the decision to include the item. NetIncome replied with his usual hauteur:
of course it shouldNetIncome has claimed "I have won Four Edward R. Murrow awards in my professional life so I have some credibility." Thing is, he's done so while using his name. The blog pseudonym lets him avoid responsibility.
it’s about someone who played a key role in the team’s inability to move.
And as evidenced by the strong opinions asserted, it’s quite interesting to Nets fans.
Missing: the Yormark story
Somehow missing from NetsDaily, however, is an article from yesterday's Record, Lawsuit against Nets exec thrown out, which began:
A judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought against New Jersey Nets CEO Brett Yormark by an ex-girlfriend, who alleged that he fraudulently induced her to have an abortion.The judge agreed with the contention of Yormark's attorney that such claims had no place in court. Indeed, Purcell didn't have any promise in writing and, even so, it would be a tough case to bring.
Reyna Purcell of Upper Saddle River said in a lawsuit filed earlier this year that she became pregnant shortly after she started dating Yormark in October 2010.
Purcell said that she wanted to have a child, but that Yormark told her he would end the relationship if she gave birth to a child. She also alleged that Yormark promised her to stay in a relationship if she got an abortion.
Purcell, 34, got an abortion in February, but “shortly thereafter [Yormark] immediately terminated the relationship with the plaintiff and has never spoken to her again,” the lawsuit alleged.
NetsDaily fans, who knew nothing about the Goldstein situation beyond what was in a thinly reported Daily News article, readily weighed in with nasty, anonymous/pseudonymous comments.
Somehow they've been deprived of the opportunity to comment on this piece of Yormark's private life that has become public via the legal system. (It was also picked up by Newsday, the Star-Ledger, and four other outlets.)
Would they call him victim of a publicity stunt? Would they say it wasn't news? Would they link credibility in his professional life to his personal life?
Would it be "quite interesting to Nets fans"?
Less than a half-hour after my post, NetsDaily responded: