Alright folks time to address Cowherd from one of the other parties of this weblog. Let me start out by saying that I agree with the sentiments of Pacifist Vikings argument and analysis of the situation as he believed it to be (as reported on Deadspin.com). However, after listening to Cowherd's show that led to the "web-bombing" of thebiglead.com, I have to share the situation. You can listen to the debated part by going to www.espnradio.com then to cowherd's show and then on the right (for tonight at least) there is the breakdown of different segments of his show. Click on "Breaking the Web" and start listening about 1 minute 30 seconds in, this will give you the situation that led to the crashing of thebiglead.com. (Update: I guess this is an ESPN Insider feature, something I am no longer suppose to have but somehow have. 11:36 p.m. EST)
First, Cowherd picked the show pretty much at random. His producer said she checks it daily and likes to read their sarcastic take on situations. They labeled it as a media website or such. The idea was that Cowherd had heard that often when they would mention a website their listeners would go to the site and then cause the site to crash. So Cowherd gets the idea that they should list a website each week and implore their listeners to go to the webpage as quickly as they can and cause it to crash and Cowherd understands that this would force the website administrator to have to buy more bandwith. So he basically chooses thebiglead.com at random and tells his listeners to bomb it.
Now if it was done in response to something thebiglead.com said about him then Pacifist Viking's argument is totally valid, but I believe it wasn't so another argument must be implored. Is it okay since it wasn't in retaliation? I would argue not. Here is an ESPN employee basically calling for a terroristic attack on a website of another entity. Some would call it stupid immature acts, but I would label it blatant terrorism on another website and there should be consequences for Cowherd. If Cowherd implored his listeners to go to a building and blow it up he would be in heep loads of trouble. Is this any different? I would argue yes there is a difference, but still there should be consequences leveled on Cowherd.
Websites can become sources of incomes for poeple. I do not know if the people at thebiglead.com run that as their source of income via advertisements etc, but if they do then Cowherd's little game just cost them a crapload of opportunity to make money. Even if they do it as a hobby and benefit monetarily from it he caused them opportunity to make money. That is blatantly wrong of Cowherd to do especially as some immature joke to see how much power his show really can have in the world of cyberspace. I believe Cowherd called for an action of Cyberspace Terrorism and he should pay the consequences and until ESPN takes accountability for his immature acts of violence they are no better then the counterparts in the world of reality.