Without checking elsewhere, how many of you know who Erin Andrews is and why her story is all over the blogosphere and has spilled into the mainstream media?
Give up? Keep reading.
Andrews is an ESPN sideline reporter not known for anything besides the fact that straight men think she’s uber-hot. Blogs that cater to straight sports fans know she’s a traffic generator, and on any blog, page views are king. Deadspin, a site I enjoy and visit almost daily, has run 102 posts on her in three years and by my rough count has easily amassed more than 2 million total page views. A gratuitous screen capture of her in 2007 eating a foot-long sandwich (titled “Assorted Cold Cut Poon.” How classy!) got 158,000; one post with a photo of her in a tight sweater got 171,000.
Deadspin is far from the only blog to drool over her, with often nothing more than a shot of her ass or tits and a sentence or two. Even corporate-owned sites have gotten in on the act; Sports Illustrated devoted an entire photo gallery to Andrews at the ESPYs. A Google blog search of “Erin Andrews” yields 2.1 million results, most of the posts with the sophistication level of jokes in a junior high cafeteria. She’s famous because she’s hot and guys want to screw her.
Now these same blogs are doing a little soul searching after video appeared that showed Andrews naked in her hotel room. The video was shot by some creep through a peephole. TMZ (who else?) has six videos and they “raise the suspicion that the person who shot them may have been familiar with her work schedule and may have been traveling with her.” ESPN is investigating.
The same blogs that promoted all Andrews all the time have suddenly sobered up and realized some things cross the line. I could find none that were linking to the video, most claiming they didn’t want to invade their privacy or avoid legal action (Deadspin threatened to ban any commenter who posted links). The hypocrisy is pretty rich — “Cold Cut Poon” is acceptable, posting a link to a video all of a sudden is an invasion of privacy. (As a side note, I would advise not searching for these naked videos since spammers and hackers have figured out a way to attached malware and viruses to copies).
I know the vast majority of Outsports readers would yawn if Andrews came into their room naked, then would tell her to put a robe on. But I have to admit this incident (and reading how much Andrews has been mentioned on websites the past few years) crystallized something for me the more I thought about it — I am sick of the straight people (and some gays) who harp that it’s just gay men who are sex-obsessed.
This charge has been leveled at Outsports by those who object to us running photo galleries that often feature shirtless jocks. These same people seem to think straight guys prefer women in petticoats or burkas (ever hear of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue?). We make no apologies for our galleries, which are of athletes at their competitions, not beautiful sideline reporters who should be a sideshow but are instead the main attraction on some sites.
The obsession with Andrews has been about nothing other than sex. Sports Media Watch did a terrific analysis of the Andrews affair, reaching this conclusion:
Certainly, there are very few — one would hope none — in the sports media who support the blatant infringement of Andrews’ right to privacy. But when someone is valued solely for their looks — and becomes a prominent figure solely for their looks — is it really surprising when members of the fringe of society go over the line?
I hope this incident at least gets everyone to admit that it’s men — gay, straight or bi — who are focused on sex, and that no one has the high moral ground. As I’ve often said, it’s a guy thing, not a gay thing. In the case of at least one Erin Andrews fan, unfortunately, it’s a sick and twisted obsession.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 5:42 am
My partner who loves to take pictures of exotic looking people in exotic settings whenever he travels has a clear, if self-enforced, policy: always ask the person first.
Whether he actually follows this policy strictly I have no idea.
But peephole papparazzi should know better, whether amateur or professional. I think straight guys will eventually blame their victim in this case, if they haven’t already: She had no veil?
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 9:13 am
What sports fan wouldn’t know who she is? She’s involved in ESPN’s coverage of MLB, college basketball, and college football. She gets a ton of screen time. And yes she’s hot. She’s also an incredibly nice person and just as good if not better of sideline reporter as anybody else out there. I’m not sure why your post has such a negative view towards her.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 11:54 am
I don’t think she’s anything special as a sideline reporter. If she didn’t look like she did I doubt she’d have the job. Still, no one should ever have their privacy violated in this way.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 2:36 pm
“I’m not sure why your post has such a negative view towards her.”
Scott, I wasn’t being negative about her but sarcastic about the lperson who took her photo, or video, through a peephole as suggested in Jim’s article:”Now these same blogs are doing a little soul searching after video appeared that showed Andrews naked in her hotel room. The video was shot by some creep through a peephole.” I think that’s sorta “Free-press Gone Wild”.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Erin Andrews is an excellent sideline reporter and this article is quite unfair towards her. Just because she is pretty doesn’t mean she does a bad job. Yes some people like her only for her looks, but she has risen up the ESPN ranks because she knows her sports and usually doesn’t hold back during her sidelines reporting.
Furthermore, she is a commentator on EA NCAA football 2010. How her looks got her this job, you will have to explain to me.
As a gay man that loves sports, I can easily say I don’t agree that she is “not known for anything besides the fact that straight men think she’s uber-hot.”
The point of this article seemed to be about gay vs straight hypersexuality and the abuse of privacy. I don’t think insulting the topic helps strenghten the point.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
My intention was not to be mean to Andrews, though I see how it could have come across that way. The point is, though, that the web obsession with her has nothing to do with whether she is or is not a quality sideline report, but is all about her looks.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Oh come on Jim, how many other reporters male or female has this happened too (zero so your argument is pretty subjective)? There’s no question that if any major anchor/reporter male or female at ESPN, ABC, NBC etc had a tape like this go public the blogosphere (hell even main stream meda)would devote ample attention to it. Her “looks” play a part of course, but your argument way overstates the basic fact that blogs and media eat up anything “celebrity”.
on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Actually, I’ll leave it up to Will Leitch at Deadspin to answer your point and make mine:
“This is not just any sideline reporter snoop video. It’s Erin Andrews. If this is Holly Rowe, or Jill Arrington, or Michele Tafoya, this story is over in a day, if it even goes that far. But it wasn’t. It was Erin Andrews. She was not called America’s Sideline Sex Object: She was called America’s Sideline Princess.”
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 1:52 am
I don’t know who is Erin Andrews. But I will appriate this kind you femail as you describe like those biexual girls from _BiFlirts.com_. We are eye suckers.
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 11:00 am
lol, falling back on Deadspin? Nice work Jimbo! Anyways your argument is weak, and convolted, and one big “What if” “Maybe” guessing game.
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 11:44 am
It’s sad to see that, despite how far we’ve advanced, we still cannot have a forthright conversation about sex and our culture’s dysfunctional attitudes towards it. I applaud the author’s attempt to explore this.
Who she was, what she does for a living, who likes her, who doesn’t, what this guy said or that girl thought is completely, utterly irrelevant.
Andrews was shamefully violated. This should be shocking and roundly condemned by everyone who values the right to privacy.
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
USF Fan: No one denies that the media eat up anything celebrity, but Erin Andrews is in a league of her own. She is a sideline reporter and if you can point to any sideline reporter that has gotten a quarter of the attention she has, you might have a point. If there was a peephole video of Dr. Jack Arute, I doubt that story would have become a major topic in the blogosphere.
My larger point was pointing out the hypocrisy that gay men are sex-focused and straight men are not; I would think that hypocrisy is beyond dispute.
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 4:02 pm
If Erin Andrews were not so “hot,” she wouldn’t have a job on TWWL. I’ve seen her work. We have female sports reporters in Denver (e.g. Susie Wargen and Alana Rizzo) who run rings around her …and they’re good-looking, too. Ever hear of Frank Magid & Associates? It’s a Iowa media consultation company that does galvanic response tests to determine whether female candidates for TV jobs hit the “hot meter” with male viewers. What the hell do people expect? Having said that, peeping into her hotel room is disgusting.
on Jul 23rd, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Erin is a star in the sports world for the same reason Sarah Palin is a star in the political world- so the middle-aged limp-dick rush limbaugh-types can oogle their goodies when they see them on “tha teevee”. These women don’t have to have any accomplishments or even be good at their jobs, so long as they are hot! it’s pathetic!
on Jul 24th, 2009 at 6:59 am
As a woman (and a lesbian), I’m sad to read the contemptuous comments about Erin Andrews. Whether or not you find her attractive (I don’t), her privacy was invaded, perhaps by a co-worker. That’s scary.
on Jul 27th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Within days of this post, this same blog has the football player whose cock shows through his pants, and a post on see-through basketball shorts. Maybe there’s hypocrisy in the perceptions of gay and straight men, but that doesn’t mean you’re actually obligated to live down to stereotypes about gay men at every turn.
on Jul 27th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Yeah, and the John Madden peephole hotel video got zero hits.
on Jul 27th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
“Within days of this post, this same blog has the football player whose cock shows through his pants, and a post on see-through basketball shorts.” That’s just a coincidence. There are a number of different people contributing to the blog, and at least in my case, there’s no planning or consultation on the subject of a post. I don’t post that much on things like this, or hot guys or even gay-related issues.