hey gawker dudes. what the fuck is wrong with you?

/I'm willing to give that dude's landlord the benefit of the doubt considering that this guy is a totally crazy conspiracy theorist

― iatee, Monday, July 20, 2015 5:08 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink/

the dispute was in texas, wasn't it? a guy with some colorful ideas about how the world is governed and a few tactical firearms can't rent a place? like, what's it really about? i know i know, we'll never know, we shouldn't know, we don't even need to know what we know now etc etc

based on what you've seen from his personal interactions, would you want this guy in your building?

no.

i'm not really arguing with you.

pulling away from the particular story, how does unionization of journalists work in regards to editorial policy? obviously unions help with collective bargaining when it comes to compensation and are a way to negotiate with the management, but does the union do anything regarding the relationship between writers/editorial and management? could writers file a grievance with the union and it'd result in a union negotiation with management/owners?

can't believe I'm the same age as J0rdan Sargent and I've never outed a C-level executive in a major internet blog website

wow, a balls-deej throwdown about who's a sell-out, i didn't know this festival was going to have one of those "classic band plays album in full" sets

― da croupier, Monday, July 20, 2015 5:24 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Iirc our first clusterfuck involved him googling my email address and posting pictures of the college I was attending

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2015/07/8572431/gawkers-denton-not-company-i-built

haha okay nick

Vox is already Vox. Gawker will be Gawker. Our explainers will be juicier. And stories bolder.

huffington post is still the worst site, right

Oh by miles.

Many Gawker editorial staffers remain convinced that Denton pulled the post to appease advertisers

what a country!

huffington post got kinda haughty about the trump campaign not being a real campaign but just a deluded ego stroke which is funny cuz, um -

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Arianna_Huffington_thumb.jpg/220px-Arianna_Huffington_thumb.jpg

i mean.. is that supposed to be some kind of smoking gun? advertisers write the checks. of course their interests will be considered. why wouldn't they be? if you're running a business, you would have to be a moron to ignore the people writing the checks.

xpost

anyway congrats to max, best decision he's made since 'what if a dog...could blog?', the only way is up. good luck to everybody figuring out what's wrong w/ gawker dudes.

"maybe there won't be another war in iraq after all"

plz wait til the old one's finished (it won't be)

so

story nobody seems to think should have run
loads of ppl against story in-house (or so its hinted but no real figures?)
story runs
loads of readers against story
mgmt pull story
x amt of editors against pulling of story (how many editors does a gawker type site need rly idk)
gawker considers the above process an outrage and cries all weekend

anything else?

what was most disappointing was max spinning this whole 'actually gay panic hit pieces are the most noble thing a journalist can aspire to'.

this is otm btw. you work where the pay's best and you do what you gotta do but max's whole "no, free speech was made for empty malicious garbage that serves the interests of my immeasurably wealthy employer" schtick was just the saddest thing and feels like a point of no return. like there's one book that once you've bought it you can't unbuy and it's Atlas Shrugged, the ink rubs off or something

wow, a balls-deej throwdown about who's a sell-out, i didn't know this festival was going to have one of those "classic band plays album in full" sets
― da croupier, Monday, July 20, 2015 5:24 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

They def went balls deej into the debate over fact checking

http://i.imgur.com/5jGE5D0.png

rusty foster ran a poll

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/421471/Tabs/2015-07-20/Screenshot%202015-07-20%2011.31.17.png

huffington post is still the worst site, right

Salon

i thought gawker's blogging dog was biting ilx's a puppy's schtick

like there's one book that once you've bought it you can't unbuy and it's Atlas Shrugged, the ink rubs off or something

Lold irl

ok one last thing i'll note, not to excuse gawker etc but like not long before this the ny post were basically stalking and humiliating this random non-public figure homeless man and unlike this fiasco i literally haven't read anything about that anywhere...except gawker

http://31.media.tumblr.com/e8e63766aa39817c53496d123d0cbf0a/tumblr_inline_n8ok442Rwo1s8u9k3.gif

i yell at my dad sometimes when he brings the nypost back from the deli if that helps

Salon

― Matt Armstrong, Monday, July 20, 2015 7:45 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I have this ancient "Salon: Makes You Think" t-shirt that i don't know i how i ended up with from um, 1997?

And it still fits me but i'll be damned if i'm comfortable wearing it in public.

thank you for weighing in.

jealous that ppl can afford to resign over principles this half-assed tbh

and vaguely interested to see whether john cook will 'sell out'

i think i stopped regularly reading salon when they went to that quasi-subscription model, not too long i think after they were running ads like this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhmPqyJImKo. griel marcus real life top ten stopped running there and i found other crap to read. i'm not sure i buy into that golden age of the internet stuff on that other thread but i do remember and kinda miss when my daily internet surfing was i'd glance at suck, feed, salon, a&l daily, the atlantic - UNBOUND, and maybe espn page 2 and my internet surfing was tapped in an hour and half, maybe two hours.

took a while to remember that's what linda tripp looked like watching that ad just now.

There's no reason to think Max is trying to fool us into thinking he thought the article was rad when he actually opposed its publication.

griel marcus real life top ten stopped running there and i found other crap to read. i'm not sure i buy into that golden age of the internet stuff on that other thread but i do remember and kinda miss when my daily internet surfing was i'd glance at suck, feed, salon, a&l daily, the atlantic - UNBOUND, and maybe espn page 2 and my internet surfing was tapped in an hour and half, maybe two hours

haha yeah as usual we're in mind meld here. Also: Slate when David Edelstein wrote for'em.

Mother Jones hopped into the worst site race with their run of click bait scare pieces that culminated with KALE.

i think i didn't glance at slate until salon went pay model cuz of kinsley (edelstein was there after that though i think). i might be wrong though, i remember one of the first things i read on slate was the whole staff disclosing who they were voting for and alot of them straight up saying bush cuz bush would be dropping the antitrust stuff and their jobs would be saved. still miss suck.com a ton.

Denton's interview on capitalnewyork is a breathtaking concerto of hypocrisy and Nixon-esque denial. I knew this guy was a weasel but jesus.

In a gchat with Capital, Denton expanded on his thoughts on editorial freedom: "What I can't accept is an unlimited and subjective version of editorial freedom. It is not whatever an editor thinks it is; it is not a license to write anything; it is a privilege, protected by the constitution, and carrying with it responsibilities."

Denton said during the meeting that Gawker must have an official editorial policy based on the standard that stories published must be both true and meaningful, not merely true. Gawker cannot publish gossip like Page Six does, he said.

"Gawker’s supposed to be better that that. It’s supposed to be good gossip, it’s supposed to be juicy gossip, it’s supposed to be revealing gossip. ... I’m not saying we should never do these stories, but there has to be a point, and there really wasn’t a point to justify Gawker running this," he said.

In the past, Denton denied that Gawker writers were journalists, preferring to refer to them as bloggers. But now he's embracing the label and some of its ethical considerations.

"We actually have to recognize that we are journalists. Some measure of newsworthiness is appropriate," he said.

This may be a major departure from the editorial philosophy that animated 2007-era Gawker, but Denton wants everyone to stop living in the past.

"I’ve been told that there’s a lag, some of my ideas from seven years ago are still being treated as sacrosanct when I’ve actually moved on," he said.

is he thought of as a smart person?

jealous that ppl can afford to resign over principles this half-assed tbh

Yeah this. I've worked for companies with seriously bad practices, and customers in some cases (oil/mining conglomerates ruining PNG farms and suchlike). I couldnt even voice my concern let alone quit over it. I got mouths to feed.

jealous that ppl can afford to resign over principles this half-assed tbh

and vaguely interested to see whether john cook will 'sell out'
--mookieproof

jealous of most people who have the necessary financial cushion to resign on principles period

kinda really fucks the whole "we're going after the affluent" argument right in the gallbladder

I'm not saying people shouldn't resign or protest or otehrwise stand up for their core beliefs, that said.

is he thought of as a smart person?

In New York media world, successful = smart. Whatever logical circumlocutions are necessary to reach the conclusion that someone with more uniques than you is somehow a genius will be performed with a smile.

so

story nobody seems to think should have run
loads of ppl against story in-house (or so its hinted but no real figures?)
story runs
loads of readers against story
mgmt pull story
x amt of editors against pulling of story (how many editors does a gawker type site need rly idk)
gawker considers the above process an outrage and cries all weekend

anything else?

― irl lol (darraghmac), Monday, 20 July 2015 23:35 (Yesterday) Permalink

fucking finally, someone puts it in language I can understand! thanks darragh

Being unable to distinguish between 'i'm employable' and 'i make roughly half a mil a year' is sorta dumb imho

jealous that ppl can afford to resign over principles this half-assed tbh

Yeah this. I've worked for companies with seriously bad practices, and customers in some cases (oil/mining conglomerates ruining PNG farms and suchlike). I couldnt even voice my concern let alone quit over it. I got mouths to feed.

― I checked Snoops , and it is for real (Trayce), Monday, July 20, 2015 8:45 PM (46 minutes ago) Bookmark

same :(

max made roughly half a mil a year?

Avg cfo total comp. at CN dude prolly makes way more tbh

wow good for max

max made roughly half a mil a year?

plus bennies

Well he needed something to keep him awake editing all those weblog posts

bennies are v helpful for diagnosing and treating what the hell is wrong with gawker dudes

annnnd this thread is rapidly turning into grotesque parody of the abyss into which it has for too long stared, I'm out, thanks again to darraghmac for providing the capsule version (which I was for so long asking, to no avail)