They say all press is good press, but I'm not sure Deadspin agrees with that after the shellacking it took for trying to destroy a nine-year-old Kansas City Chiefs fan. 

(See: Deadspin Tried to Destroy a Kid for Wearing Blackface, and Then the Real Story Came Out)

The saga began in Las Vegas with the young boy attending a Chiefs road game against the Raiders. A side-profile picture emerged of him wearing a Native American headdress and black face paint. One of the columnists at Deadspin then had the brilliant idea of accusing the kid of wearing "blackface," publishing his photo to go viral for all the world to see.

It wasn't long before the real story came out, though: The boy had his face painted black and red to show support for his favorite NFL team. 

Days later, it was reported that the young boy's parents had retained legal representation, including sending a demand for a correction. Well, Deadspin has put one out, and it's...something. 

🚨🚨🚨

Deadspin with an ugly Editor's Note after they faced a lawsuit for publicly shaming a 9-year-old childhttps://t.co/lHbnlVFUeX pic.twitter.com/7DLDdKaSPo

— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) December 8, 2023

I'm no legal expert, but I'm pretty sure that's not going to cut it. The note doesn't even admit that the boy was not actually wearing blackface but had his face painted in multiple colors. Any correction on the story would be expected to include that. Instead, Deadspin essentially doubled down, suggesting that the main point of the story was missed.

I don't think that's true, though. Whatever the deeper meaning of the article regarding NFL policy, the young boy's picture was plastered on it, and the headline accused him of wearing blackface. The entire premise of the article was predicated on that accusation. The note goes on to say "We regret any suggestion we were attacking the fan." It wasn't a suggestion, though. That's exactly what the headline, picture, and article were doing. 

I can't imagine that "Editor's Note" did anything but make a lawsuit more likely. It was dripping with arrogance, it did not contain an actual apology, and it didn't even admit the major error in the story, which was the idea that the child was wearing blackface. If you were the child's parents and you already had lawyers lined up, would you be satisfied? I doubt it.

Ironically, Deadspin was once owned by Gawker, a media group that got sued out of existence by Hulk Hogan. Perhaps the lesson wasn't learned the first time around.