Late last week, an unusual tale surfaced on the internet. Several outlets, including PokerFuse, reported that PokerNews.com was prohibited from covering the Mid Stakes Poker Tour (MSPT) at the Venetian.
The story becomes even more peculiar considering that PokerNews, a website generally known for being non-controversial, is the main sponsor of the tournament series.
People immediately questioned if this was related to Adelson’s attempts to prohibit online gambling. Given that PokerNews is a prominent online affiliate globally and a well-known source for online poker news and information, it wouldn’t be surprising to find a few articles criticizing Adelson.
Initial signs suggested a positive outcome, but the initial refusal to comment by the Venetians, coupled with PokerNews’s initial statement of ignorance regarding the ban’s cause, led to the public speculating whether the ban on PokerNews was imposed from a higher authority, or if there was another reason behind the outlet’s expulsion.
I personally wasn’t persuaded. To me, it appeared as a rather trivial reason to prevent the outlet from covering the MSPT. It almost felt unreasonable, akin to the childish behavior of “I’m taking my ball and going home.”
Well, it has now been confirmed by both PokerNews and the Venetian that they were prohibited from reporting due to the online gambling connections between PokerNews and providers. So, I must admit another error on my part.
“Kathy Raymond, Executive Director of Poker Operations at The Venetian, informed PokerNews that due to their Chairman’s unequivocal stance on online gaming, the Venetian / Palazzo decided against permitting an online blog during the Mid-States Poker Tour event,” in a statement.
On Saturday, PokerNews Editor-in-Chief Donnie Peters expressed his views, “It’s evident that Sheldon Adelson is once again using his political muscle against our industry. It’s regrettable that one man’s opposition to poker can wield such power. And when I say poker, I refer to the game as a whole, not just online poker. There’s no denying that Adelson’s resistance to the digital version is impeding the overall growth of the game.”
Poker world torn over how to handle Venetian
Why do poker players still go to the Venetian despite several hinted or attempted boycotts? The Venetian is regarded as one of the world’s best poker properties, sadly, boasting an impressive room and outstanding staff.
While some individuals believe that a boycott only negatively impacts the poker room staff, others assert that it conveys a strong message, even if it doesn’t financially affect Adelson and the Venetian.
It goes without saying that this is a difficult situation for poker players. Below is my earlier opinion on a boycott of the Venetian.
Is this a misstep by Adelson?
As previously stated, the move smacks of pettiness and I believe it could potentially result in unintended consequences for Adelson and his associates. For various reasons, it is a step I would have advised against.
- It portrays PokerNews as the victim, while depicting Adelson and the Venetian as utilizing bullying strategies.
One effective method to garner public support is to position oneself as the victim. Adelson has been striving to depict advocates of online gambling as attempting to force their agenda on society.
Adelson’s recent actions against PokerNews suggest that he is attempting to impose his beliefs on everyone. It seems he is willing to resort to petty tactics like this to achieve his goals.
- The MSPT, a small scale poker tour, would have attracted little attention, particularly with the WSOP happening nearby.
Frankly, the MSPT coverage is not extensively followed and hardly registers on the poker radar, even when it’s the only tournament series happening.
The tournament at the Venetian would have been covered by PokerNews and quickly forgotten like a fleeting ship in the night. However, he turned it into a fiasco that attracted much more media attention and portrayed his property as quite unreasonable.
- From an outsider’s perspective, this act seems like that of a disgruntled individual who senses defeat; absolutely no one sympathizes with the person who displays an “I’m taking my ball and going home” attitude.
Curious about who’s prevailing in a conflict? Simply observe which side starts exhibiting desperate, irrational behaviors. This move by Adelson and the Venetian appears similar to a boxer entering the 10th round, who, in need of a knockout, swings excessively.
- This exposes Adelson to new lines of attack.
Everyone is aware that Adelson previously hosted PokerStars branded tournaments at the Venetian. His current opposition to online gambling seems more financially driven than morally, despite his claims to the contrary.
Thank you for providing another opportunity for poker supporters to criticize you. It seems fine for PokerStars to promote their brand in the Venetian in 2011, despite being essentially at odds with US law, but it’s not acceptable for PokerNews to cover a tournament series they sponsor in 2014, even though they don’t have a single online advert that contradicts current US law.
Observe that Sheldon didn’t boot the MSPT, only PokerNews.
