[quote author=crewcrazy wrote: [/b]I have a really, really hard time blaming ESPN for breaking the original story. They had sources that gave them information (Braun failed a test), they reported that information, and it was true. Brewers fans have every right to be upset at MLB for leaking the info, and probably with the way ESPN handled follow-up stories, too (anchors saying he tested positive for steroids, saying he's already been suspended, etc.). But you can't fault ESPN for breaking the news. There isn't a news source in the country that would have sat on that information and done nothing with it. Except ESPN is the news source that sat on the Bernie Fine story for 8 years because they couldn't "confirm" whether the woman on the recording was Laurie Fine. Sure, they got news that Braun failed a test. But they immediately began reporting it as fact that he tested positive for steroids. But in the following days it went from Braun testing positive for steroids, to him testing positive for a performance enhancing drug, to him testing positive for a banned substance. And no one still knows exactly what he tested positive for. So my question is this: why did ESPN refuse to report on one story because they couldn't confirm something, but they chose to report the Braun story even though they didn't have confirmation on why he failed his test?