Is Whitlock really this much of a bastard?

Far be it from me to want to keep the Erin Andrews story on people's minds any longer than it needs to be, but why would Jason Whitlock labor to find a silly race angle to this story? Not only does he directly blame Deadspin for the awful incident - despite the fact that Will Leitch wrote one of the more insightful pieces wondering whether the male sports blogosphere created an atmosphere where this horrific act might have been condoned - but he seems to somehow suggest that Pacman Jones, of all people, is the real victim here:

The Pacman Jones stripclub video served no journalistic purpose. It was aired on ESPN and everywhere else solely to titillate and entertain. The raw footage didn't help us understand the crime. There was no interaction between Jones, his entourage and the club's bouncers.

There were black asses shaking and black entertainers demonstrating how fools depart from their money. It was a reality version of Spike Lee's underrated movie Bamboozled.

America couldn't get enough of the Pacman video until Erin Andrews was caught dropping it like it was hot in front of a hotel mirror.

ESPN won't cover that story. It's climbed up on some high horse and is passing judgment on the New York Post for running pictures of ESPN's sideline Barbie.

I haven't read enough of his work to know, but he sounds disturbed or something. Is he really saying being caught undressed, unaware, by some pervert, amounts to "dropping it like it's hot"? And that Pacman Jones has the same expectation of privacy when he's throwing money around in a stripclub as anyone else should have IN THEIR HOTEL ROOM?

Sadly, had his column been about ESPN's sanctimonious silence in reference to the accusations against Ben Roethlisberger, he might have had a legitimate point about race and sports. What a jerk.