Wednesday, April 13, 2011
The impact of the Jenn Sterger interview
By Kevin Seifert
Did Jenn Sterger help or hurt herself by agreeing to a two-part interview with ABC's Good Morning America? That's the topic of this First Take debate between ESPN's Jemele Hill and Skip Bayless.
Hill was inclined to believe Sterger's insistence that she is not a "gold-digger" or "home-wrecker" after photographs and text messages that quarterback Brett Favre allegedly sent to her appeared on the website Deadspin.com.
Hill: "What did she gain out of this if she was supposedly doing this for fame? Nothing."
Bayless suggested that talking publicly about the episode isn't the best way to move past it.
My only reaction to the interviews is that it's too bad Sterger must operate from a defensive position. It's almost as if people wanted to see if she could credibly discount unproven assumptions made about her. Why has the default position always been that she must have in some way encouraged Favre? We've seen evidence of naivetÚ -- sharing the photographs with friends and confiding, even off the record, with Deadspin's editor -- but nothing to suggest she engaged in any relationship with Favre or that she has sought any financial gain.
Maybe I'm being na´ve myself, but my cynicism meter just isn't buzzing here.