Louie (Louis C.K.'s show on FX)

Aww, Gawker just cares about people you guys. This isn't at all about trying to get clicks from some barely substantiated story about a well known celebrity. So glad we got that cleared up.

"Why won't you answer us"

Answers

"Why are you lying to us"

How do you know that fear is their reason for not speaking to you?

anyway jordan i think you're right the story is honest about what it is but it would be a mistake to come away from criticisms thinking that ppl had accused you of being hypocritical or dishonest. the problem is the rush to publish damaging information about someone without fulfilling even minimal standards of authentication first.

How does the Times ever break a story without posting front-page accusations with requests for tips?

It's almost like gawker has major structural differences from the times

it's almost as if you're personally invested in that structure not being criticized

The entire point of the story is getting clicks on a day where a bunch of people are googling his name because of SNL, cmon man, cut the faux naive junk.

― a strawman stuffed with their collection of 12 cds (jjjusten), Monday, May 18, 2015 1:53 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark

you literally don't understand the internet but please say more

Nice deflection

i mean i literally don't care why you think i published something

How does the Times ever break a story without posting front-page accusations with requests for tips?

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, May 18, 2015 1:58 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark

the point of gawker is to not act like newspapers, if people have problems with that fine but i'm not going to debate the ethos of the company. it's an old and boring debate that's been going on since i was in high school.

it's almost as if you're personally invested in that structure not being criticized

― Mordy, Monday, May 18, 2015 1:00 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Lol I'm not tho

"We recieved this tip months ago but at that point didn't really care that much about the allegations or victims because Louis CK wasn't hosting SNL that weekend."

you might be familiar with the concept of a "peg" but apparently not

the hope is that by putting these morsels of the story out there, we might facilitate the process of finding people who will talk about their experiences with louis, or at least help us piece together more stories people have heard about other people's experiences with louis.

― J0rdan S., Monday, May 18, 2015 1:50 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The entire point of the story is getting clicks on a day where a bunch of people are googling his name because of SNL, cmon man, cut the faux naive junk.

― a strawman stuffed with their collection of 12 cds (jjjusten), Monday, May 18, 2015 1:53 PM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think it's both. gawker readers and writers probably do think that their tactics allow them to "take down" the powerful. there's a left wing populism there that has precedents in american journalism... it's just ugly, at least to me, and i am not really convinced it serves the public interest.

i don't think this debate is boring and irrelevant. it seems interesting and relevant.

jordan, you're really stretching things calling yourself a "reporter"

it's an old and boring debate

"boring" b/c you don't like the implications, which is that the website that pays your bills is craven and ethically bankrupt

i mean if you all would like to have the debate then be my guest but my choice of employment makes clear which side i stand on and gawker as a company doesn't need me defending it on message boards

and yet here we are

but srsly, as with spotify on ilm i'd totally understand not wanting to respond to critiques of your employer on your funtime forum. so don't!

well i don't mind engaging to a point about things i've personally written, but whether gawker is an ethical company or something is not a discussion i feel the need to participate in

then don't

im not

i agree with da croupier.

you don't have a responsibility to respond, j0rdan. sorry if you felt like i and others were "grilling" you.

buuuut the question of gawker's ethics is important for people who care about american media, i feel, especially in the era of the decline of trad newspapers

i didnt know croups worked for spotify, nice gig :-)

Jordan mate. go and have a lie down. You're posting on a message board about how your company doesn't need you defending it on message boards. This never ends well.

haha omg if i was an accountant on spotify i would have zero web presence

accountant for spotify, i mean. the last thing i'd want is all you needlers asking me wtf is going on there

If you guys want to look into ethics in American media there are plenty of places to start that aren't websites based on gossip. Maybe everybody forgot NYTimes cheerleading us into the Iraq.

yeah no one on ilx ever criticizes the MSM for their compliance in administrative abuses of power

Alright I'm going to leave this thread to you guys, you seem to be in such a great mood.

bye Adam!

Jordan mate. go and have a lie down. You're posting on a message board about how your company doesn't need you defending it on message boards. This never ends well.

― Position Position, Monday, May 18, 2015 1:18 PM (49 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol how did this get turned around so jordan is the one accused of being aggy

u guys harassed him til he answered, then harassed him about his answer, then harassed him for bothering to answer at all

i guess treesh is the only one who managed the hat trick but

it's called 'a treship'

i don't know one way or the other obv but louis' standup material about women is usually the weakest part of his set. there's a confounding big-upping of stereotypes that you don't see him indulge in with other subjects.

u guys harassed him til he answered, then harassed him about his answer, then harassed him for bothering to answer at all

We're supposed to pity a Gawker writer for being harassed? That's a good one.

I think we shld turn our ire against some site no one here writes for, then we won't have to fret about feelings

fighting with gawker writers abt what theyve written is an ilx genre with so much potential... and yet

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/29ge32/big-time-in-hollywood--fl-the-pitch

We're supposed to pity a Gawker writer for being harassed? That's a good one.

― Position Position, Monday, May 18, 2015 2:26 PM (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

who said anything about pity? you arent doing a good job of measuring the temperature in the room

Question question? Sarcasm sarcasm.

hardon 4 gawker is such a pathetic ilx stance I can't even

is shrill outrage at it any less pathetic?

lol "shrill"

don't u tone police me :p

http://www.makethemaccountable.com/images/0802/Shrill-HRC.gif

i'm getting 77 autogoon keepin' it negative dickhole zing posse vibes from the way the argument is breaking down here

classic

shrieking round the kitchen rite now temperature in the room is thru the roof