quick generational check: does EVERYBODY have a picture of their asshole on their phone? asking for a friend
― you are extreme, Patti LuPone. (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:13 (ten years ago)
xp smdh at the conclusion of that richjuz piece.
We will continue to risk outrage by telling the truth. We will continue to make editorial decisions that yield self-righteous denouncement. We will continue to publish stories that even our coworkers dislike and disagree with because every human being on earth has his or her own interpretation of what the truth is and what the pursuit of it entails.
Yeah, this seems like a great time to debate the nature of truth. These are exactly the kind of deep philosophical questions that outing a CFO on a gossip site invites. And not at all a pompous way of saying "quit being mean to my friend, everyone."
― A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:13 (ten years ago)
Loyalty to your friend is great but don't disguise it as a lecture.
― A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:16 (ten years ago)
He says in a lecturing tone
because every human being on earth has his or her own interpretation of what the truth is and what the pursuit of it entails.
Essentially announcing themselves the winner in the race to the bottom.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:22 (ten years ago)
http://gamingforevermore.weebly.com/uploads/2/5/8/9/25893592/5410601_orig.jpg
― A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:30 (ten years ago)
gawker writing on this topic now embarrassing in the way that high school and university valedictorian speeches are embarrassing
― an asteroid could hit the planet (Sufjan Grafton), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:33 (ten years ago)
The race to the photos of the bottom more like xps
― feargal czukay (NickB), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:34 (ten years ago)
― you are extreme, Patti LuPone. (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:13 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
i have a bunch of pictures of assholes on my phone. but i really don't know why we took so many selfies at the last ilx fap...
― where the sterls have no name (s.clover), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:38 (ten years ago)
1) all this "wife and family" stuff. lots of people have spouses and families. why does that make a difference one way or another. you can't out of one side of your mouth complain about victorian morality or w/e and out of the other be shouting "think of the children"
it's not victorian morality to think how one's actions might affect others bro, it's simple human decency. "the children" here sub for "consider maybe thinking outside 'ooh I get to say what I want!' for half a fucking second and consider whether there are human consequences." if that' s too victorian for you then I feel p bad for you tbh
― Joan Crawford Loves Chachi, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:39 (ten years ago)
^^^^^
― a (waterface), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:40 (ten years ago)
Human consequences take a backseat to The Truth, maaaaan.
― Something Called Fudge (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:45 (ten years ago)
I think there's a public interest in the fallout from Gawker's reckless reportage. It's a truth I'd personally like to see them pursue, at any rate.
― Something Called Fudge (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:50 (ten years ago)
this is such a sad whatever it is. tedious too. i was looking at the webby awards page recently to see if i could find something good to read and Vice wins like every category. they are the great gray lady of the internet.
― scott seward, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:50 (ten years ago)
LOL Gawker just namechecked, in typical stumblebum fashion, by Jon Snow on Channel 4 News.
― Possibly Fingers (Tom D.), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:53 (ten years ago)
The White Gawkers
― Most Scientifically Beautiful Face (President Keyes), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:55 (ten years ago)
the thing about Vice is that it's really easy to ignore the 90% of their coverage that is dumb/offensive/whatever for the 10% that is fantastic (adjust those %'s as need be but no one gave coverage - complete w/ intimate video - of eg anti-balaka like Vice did).
― Mordy, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:56 (ten years ago)
this is kind of the end game of enjoying a website that has been positioned as a tabloid blog and has always had gossip, from the early "gawker stalker" days to the tmz-lite and jokey tmz-like articles to ones where they break lurid stories. we love the long-form articles on race and sex and politics but they're just one piece of the site's content.
I have no idea what the tabloids and celebrity gossip rags on the supermarket end caps have in them outside of what country music star is cheating or w/e and whether this particular story would have run in those, but the nastier articles in those definitely aren't morally better than this crap. But I'm not picking those up. Maybe shouldn't be picking up gawker.com but it's free and has stuff I like.
― Upright Mammal (mh), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:58 (ten years ago)
I'm assuming in some other context because no way did this make Channel 4 News.
― Matt DC, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:08 (ten years ago)
xpost i got made fun of the other time i mentioned this on ilx but since my clicks = money for these entities, i have had a total self-imposed moratorium on clicking any links to gawker, huffpo, slate, buzzfeed and several others for quite some time. I just won't do it bc that click is me "buying their magazine" and fuck all of these sites, starve them to death IMO
(NB I made an exception for the runaways piece on huffpo)
― demonic mnevice (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:15 (ten years ago)
j0hn D is advocating for the same kind of moratorium fwiw
― Cory Sklar, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:16 (ten years ago)
good! where? on social media?
― demonic mnevice (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:19 (ten years ago)
Yes, it was just a story on C4 news, tied together with the Ashley Madison hack.
― error: unclean shutdown (suzy), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:19 (ten years ago)
"Think of the children" was funny and accurate once on the simpsons two decades ago and even then it was probably overrated.
― nomar, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:22 (ten years ago)
gawker, huffpo, slate, buzzfeed
slate?
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:32 (ten years ago)
"don't trust anyone who doesn't have a picture of their asshole on their phone" is the rallying cry of our age
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:33 (ten years ago)
#ConfederacyofAssholes
― you are extreme, Patti LuPone. (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:35 (ten years ago)
They just reposted this piece without comment from February over on Jezebel.
http://gawker.com/brands-are-not-your-friend-1684232182
― how's life, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:35 (ten years ago)
Someday we're going to be unlocking doors and paying for groceries with scans of our assholes so I guess the only downside of having asshole pics on your phone are potential identity theft.
― Something Called Fudge (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:37 (ten years ago)
Wesley Snipes tearing someone's asshole out in Demolition Man 2.
― Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:39 (ten years ago)
I'm not sure that questioning the sending of reproducible/distributable digital images of yr genitalia is necessarily reducible to a generational gap
none of those words look spelt right btw
― irl lol (darraghmac), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:41 (ten years ago)
*sexy computer voice*"rectal scan complete. access granted."
― gwyneth anger (patron sailor), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:41 (ten years ago)
I'll say it is.
― Norse Jung (Eric H.), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:42 (ten years ago)
all brands are inherently psychopathic. A company does not have feelings. It will never love you. It does not love its workers. It likely screws them over. Think about that the next time you tweet at a brand, or defend one online. Treating brands like buddies isn't just embarrassing for all parties—sympathy for a brand is antipathy for all humans. The great friending of the brand undermines the vital skepticism of corporate America and capitalism altogether. It's horrid enough that our laws treat corporations as people—to treat them as personal friends is just rotten.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:42 (ten years ago)
no no no no Klein no
― irl lol (darraghmac), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:45 (ten years ago)
I agree completely w Mordy's quote
xp
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:46 (ten years ago)
Cosign that brand loyalty is bizarre
― niels, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:47 (ten years ago)
pretty sure that Mazda loves me
― an asteroid could hit the planet (Sufjan Grafton), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:48 (ten years ago)
i'm not sure what this has to do with anything except maybe being a veiled objection to the managing partners
― gwyneth anger (patron sailor), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:50 (ten years ago)
Sufjan, Mazda has always spoken very highly of you
― Ma$e-en-scène (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:52 (ten years ago)
Mazda esp appreciated all the dick pics
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:52 (ten years ago)
This is the weirdest recent example for me, sry for ot https://twitter.com/blobtower/status/610903479398182913 that's justin vernon on apple
― niels, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:53 (ten years ago)
I'm starting to think that there are a number of Gawkerers that have been under the impression that they were working for Democracy Now but are just discovering that they were surreptitiously sponsored by Pizza Hut the whole time.
― Something Called Fudge (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:53 (ten years ago)
Energizer.
― how's life, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 19:59 (ten years ago)
yup
― Cory Sklar, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:00 (ten years ago)
Buzzfeed and Gawker are like garbage landfills that decided to get into the condo development business, but they only build condos on half the landfill and keep the other half a garbage dump.
― five six and (man alive), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:09 (ten years ago)
"I know it smells but look at the view!"
― Mordy, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:12 (ten years ago)
Admittedly, Buzzfeed has some great journalism.
― five six and (man alive), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:14 (ten years ago)
But yeah, they're weird experiments in going "legit" while continuing to seek profit from the junk that launched them. I think the Gawker story caused all the more outrage because Gawker tries so hard to hold itself out as something more substantial than the millennial version of a supermarket tabloid.
― five six and (man alive), Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:17 (ten years ago)
definitely. if they were like "look we're trash and we post trash articles" no one would care but they're like "we are intrepid brave journalists" and then not only that but "this is a great example of our intrepid brave journalism!"
― Mordy, Tuesday, 21 July 2015 20:19 (ten years ago)