It's located here.

C'mon over.

(UPDATE: Comments and RSS feeds not available for blogs on new site yet. Patience.)

"In light of the New York Post's decision to run graphic photos of ESPN reporter Erin Andrews, we have decided to stop utilizing Post reporters on any of our outlets," ESPN's senior VP of communications, Chris LaPlaca said.

"Erin was grievously wronged here, and while we understand the Post's decision to cover this as a news story, their running photos obtained in such a fashion went well beyond the boundaries of common decency in the interest of sensationalism. This is not a decision we undertook lightly, but we feel it is an appropriate one."

The Post used images both in print and on its Web site Tuesday from a video the showed Andrews in the nude in a hotel room.

It is not yet clear where the video was shot or who shot it, but Andrews' attorney has promised legal action against any media outlet that publishes the material.

It has not been determined how long the ban on Post employees will remain in place.

Among those most affected are Kevin Kernan and Lenn Robbins, who regularly appear on "First Take" on ESPN2 and Joel Sherman, who appears on 1050 ESPN radio.

Mark Cannizzaro also appears periodically on ESPN outlets, and beat writers from various sports sometimes are interviewed in 1050 or other stations.

LaPlaca stressed that the decision was not directed at the Post employees who have appeared on ESPN outlets, whom he called "innocent bystanders."

A spokesman for NewsCorp, which owns the Post, declined comment. The Post's communication department did not respond to a request for comment.

CBS and Fox used snippets of the video itself Tuesday, which LaPlaca called "beyond the pale."

But he said ESPN could not take the kind of action against those networks it did against the Post because ESPN does not regularly employ those networks' personnel.

Thanks for reading the 5,222 posts on this platform since May 2, 2007.

Time to start over. Please come along!

Photo: AP

Why? The network offered some context today to try to further clarify its policy regarding reporting civil suits, which it sometimes does and sometimes doesn't.

Here is what it said were among factors it considered in the Roethlisberger case:

"We're generally very cautious with civil suits that impugn a person's reputation or character."

"We consider the subject's track record/previous history with similar allegations."

"Whether the subject addresses it publicly." Didn't Big Ben's lawyer do that? "In this case, we did not feel Roethlisberger's lawyer's response was enough to warrant our reporting."

"We also consider how such allegation might impact upon the professional performance of the subject/his team."

Example? Roethlisberger is scheduled for a taping of Shaquille O'Neal's reality show. If he doesn't appear, ESPN might revisit the matter based on the possibility it might be "impacting his business decisions and/or his team." An even more obvious example would be if he has to skip part of training camp to be deposed.

ESPN said it recently reported on a planned civil suit against Shannon Brown "because he was playing significant minutes for Lakers in the middle of their championship run in the NBA Playoffs; there was also a police report filed in that case."

In the past, ESPN has passed on reporting civil suits against Michael Vick and Robert Alomar - in the latter case only doing so when Alomar's father discussed it publicly.

What about reporting a suit against Adam (Pacman) Jones?

ESPN did so, it said, "because of his history/past record."

Clear?

(UPDATE: ESPN.com posted a Big Ben story tonight!)

Photo: AP

Many of them.

The schedule can be viewed by clicking below and reading the news release fresh off the presses from Bristol.

No mention of Ben Roethlisberger in it. Sorry.

Ed O'Bannon wants to help.

Images of LeBron getting dunked on evidently have resurfaced!

Now I really need to dig up that video of me dunking on the big guy before a Cavs vs. Knicks game last season.

(UPDATE: The video is up now. Thanks Big Lead for heads up.)

At least Erin is clothed in the picture on the cover, unlike Tuesday.

Unfortunately, I make an appearance in the story, too!

The article quotes something I wrote in Newsday about a brief conversation I had with Ms. Andrews recently.

But instead of crediting it as "Newsday's Neil Best wrote" it reads, "Sports blogger Neil Best said," as if the Post reporter had interviewed me for his story.

Oy. In lieu of an apology, please don't do that to anyone else ever again.

(Full Erin Exploitation disclosure: I just noticed the Newsday.com version of my column includes three separate links to photo galleries of her.)

So I did.

I spent about three hours Tuesday discussing this with a half-dozen sports media figures - Is there anything else people talk about these days? - and ended up feeling lousier than ever about the whole thing.

Will this latest spasm of media navel-gazing make newspaper Web sites and bloggers less apt to rely on gratuitous pictures of attractive women?

Probably not, but I can't control that.

Will it make this particular blogger less apt to do so?

We shall see, I suppose, but I'd like to think so.

Their replacements? Um, no one. Looking to cut costs, the Isles will simulcast MSG Plus' TV coverage, featuring Howie Rose and Billy Jaffe.

That's going to be a little strange.

In unrelated Islanders media news, Logan and I learned today that C.J. Papa did not have his contract renewed as MSG Plus' reporter for game telecasts.

No word on a replacement yet.

The network's statement:

"We debated it internally and feel that this is the appropriate thing to do. Despite the attention it's gotten, it comes down to a news value judgment. We didn''t see the news value to this story, particularly since it has no bearing on her role as an on-air reporter."

It seems I landed on the team's waiting list when I registered for the new stadium PSL auction last fall, and my less-than-a-year of waiting paid off with my big chance to join the Mark Sanchez/Rex Ryan fun at the Meadowlands.

I politely declined. The woman politely asked me why. I said because I just don't want to buy season tickets. She asked why I was on the list. I told her about the PSL auction thing. She asked if I were interested in tickets for 2010. I told her I was not.

She asked whether she could take me off the waiting list. I told her I would like to stay on to continue receiving information about tickets in the future. She said the list mostly is for people actually interested in buying tickets. I said she could remove my name.

Newsday and many other outlets have published at least the AP account.

ProFootballTalk.com reported ESPN issued a "do not report" edict on the story to its staff.

Why? Roethlisberger has a warm relationship with ESPN, including business dealings with the network such as appearing at its "upfront" presentation to advertising buyers. Hmm.

It turns out ESPN generally avoids reporting on civil suits against sports figures.

Its statement on this matter: "At this point, we are not reporting the allegations against Ben Roethlisberger because no criminal complaint has been filed. As far as we know, this is a civil lawsuit that Roethlisberger has yet to address publicly."

(UPDATE: Not that ESPN never reports on civil suits, or even plans to file civil suits, as evidenced by this from last month. Hmm.)

(New ESPN ombudsman Don Ohlmeyer is going to have a busy first column in August!)

Then SNY's Chris Carlin did the same.

Far be it from me to advocate anyone cancelling a subscription to any newspaper in these troubled times, but the Post's decision has struck a nerve in media land.

(UPDATE: Apparently the Post was not alone in widely disseminating the EA videos. It was done on national TV, too. Oy.)

Will Leitch, one of the founding fathers of sports blogging, has an interesting essay on all of this EA stuff here.