[Wongboy]

Bob - I agree with your point, but I think there is an important distinction here.

It is not unusual top see an ESPN columnist who bemoans the fact that the NBA has gotten "thuggish", or that player salaries are out of control, or that the average American family is priced out of a day at a MLB ballpark. All of these are negative aspects of the sports, but the key here is that the writers are usually genuinely interested in the success of the sport and they are voicing their concerns in an effort to make the sport better.

I also see articles that say a sport is dumb, boring, or whatever. Usually the writer makes it very clear that this is a personal opinion.

The difference here is that the writer is supporting the criminalization of a sport that generates a substantial portion of ESPN's coverage. He isn't saying "Online poker is dumb, I don't know why anyone plays it". He is saying "Online poker is evil, people should not be allowed to play". This contrasts greatly with the extensive coverage of Moneymaker's story as an online qualifier and the highlights of online poker pros when they play in ESPN televised events.