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

I wish they'd amend stories with info on why they're trending again - the Jezebel redditor incest story is in the sidebar again but I have no clue why.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, May 5, 2016 11:56 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark

sometime it's really hard to figure out why this happens http://gawker.com/why-is-gawkers-top-story-a-four-year-old-post-about-vaj-1586474680

Kinja definitely could use a little more "curator" intervention from time to time

Is it just me or have Kotaku and io9 kind of devolved into frontends for SPLOID!!!! with like <5 vertical-specific pieces per day?

is this shit even supposed to be funny? Every time I think this guy is going to turn a corner and stop pissing me off, he doesn't.

http://gawker.com/science-watch-sleazy-space-sex-1775158310

ashley feinberg and gabrielle bluestone are pretty funny sometimes.

http://screengrabber.deadspin.com/bartolo-colon-jacks-first-career-dong-1775360860

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/gorgeous-shot-of-an-espresso-being-poured-from-the-mach-1774825130

I don’t even drink coffee but after seeing an espresso shot get pulled through a naked portafilter on an espresso machine, it’s the only thing I want in my life. Watching the water swish through the finely ground coffee beans and then seeing it seep through each hole and then finally getting being allowed to witness how the various flows group together to form that golden brown liquid of the gods. Man oh man, it’s like being around to see a superweapon charging up.
― sexy dander (Stevie D(eux)), Wednesday, May 4, 2016 10:07 PM (3 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

fwiw this existed in the pre-clickbait era: http://espressoporn.blogspot.com/

jon stewart on the louis ck gawker "story" at 1:14:04
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da5VYSPsoE0
curious how the follow up to that for-sure-damning-evidence-is-on-the-way blind item is coming along

well

i've received dozens & dozens of emails about him. i still get them monthly even tho the story is like a year old. most of them are people passing on secondhand knowledge, but i've gotten several from people with close accounts of harassment. unfortunately people are reticent to come forward because comedy is a close knit community that privileges people who can keep secrets. this is true for hollywood writ large, really. being a whistleblower is a giant risk to someone's livelihood in a number of ways. i've found this to be true for people with nascent or nonexistent careers and also for people who you would think could not be touched by simply saying something about an incident of harassment. people with hundred million dollar movie budgets and multiple televised award show acceptance speeches have said things off the record to me but then refused to speak about them any further. so i dunno. i still report out the story when i can. ultimately i'm in no way less convinced of its truth.

i read that as you're suggesting the system is complicit and that's why you can't be reasonably expected to report this story more deeply. I'm not sure how that's any different from any scandal that's ever been broken? Isn't one of the key purposes of investigative journalism to unearth a cover up? To what degree are you willing to take on responsibility for the difficulty of evidence gathering by publishing hearsay before you had on-the-record confirmation? And if you truly believe that your allegations are true, what degree of complicity do you take on by not more actively furthering the story?

Or are these naive questions?

people with hundred million dollar movie budgets and multiple televised award show acceptance speeches

lol. this is a great blind item in and of itself.

I'm curious what 'actively furthering' you're suggesting, ulysses - wacky 80s drag and seduction on Jordan's part?

'actively furthering' = contacting potential interview subjects and taking the time to research any of these dozens of emails per month to produce anyone who will speak on the record with an allegation and perhaps some semblance of evidence to back up their claims (i.e. eyewitnesses)

lol good work gizmodo

In Captain America: Civil War Tony Stark Uses a Phone Only Sold in China

<422 words later>

Correction (5/11/16 8:45 EST): Tony Stark does not use a Vivo V3 as our story suggests. He uses a transparent Vivo concept phone.

related to the previous posts:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572?utm_campaign=digest&utm_medium=email&utm_source=app

'actively furthering' = contacting potential interview subjects and taking the time to research any of these dozens of emails per month to produce anyone who will speak on the record with an allegation and perhaps some semblance of evidence to back up their claims (i.e. eyewitnesses)

― ulysses, Wednesday, May 11, 2016 9:59 AM (10 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Isn't Jordan saying this is what he's doing ? 🤔

+ making the story public allows others to reach out/ could (per Maura's link) lead to broader recognition / may serve as a heads up for future victims....

that's actualy J0rd in emoji form

I'm on the JS side here. Obviously the individual of interest isn't suffering from the accusations or there would be grounds for a suit. Opening the question isn't begging the question.

Isn't Jordan saying this is what he's doing ?

I'm not defending LCK; I don't have enough information to even have an opinion on if he needs defending. I'm also not shaming JS for starting the conversation; my argument is that his reportage has been improperly presented and prosecuted. It's the fourth estate's responsibility to bring the truth to light and (here's where I may be being naive) if you take the risk of presenting an accusation under your byline, the reporter's credibility then rests on proving that story up to the point of an unbiased and reasonable reader's doubt _before_ publishing. Based on the articles I read, JS's writing on the subject hasn't met that standard.

making the story public allows others to reach out/ could (per Maura's link) lead to broader recognition / may serve as a heads up for future victims....

Or more to the point:

This seems like a bold claim for a dude actively soliciting emails for anyone willing to confirm in your article. Not trying to ruin a scoop or anything, but I assume you're saying you've got actual confirmation?
― a strawman stuffed with their collection of 12 cds (jjjusten), Sunday, May 17, 2015 3:56 AM

he did a long bit about child molestation on SNL and then did a skit about sexually domination
― J0rdan S., Sunday, May 17, 2015 4:00 AM (11 months ago)

sexual domination**
― J0rdan S., Sunday, May 17, 2015 4:00 AM (11 months ago)

he also said "on fleek"
― J0rdan S., Sunday, May 17, 2015 4:01 AM (11 months ago)

tbh I can never tell if the flippant attitude is a coping mechanism for reporting some heinous shit or, depending on the writer/editor just sociopathy

feel like J0rdan has more of the former, pretty sure at least one notable ex-gawker employee was the latter

I'll go on the record about Louis if J0rdan will just get me out of the greys.

good deal, imo

wait there are ilxors stuck in the grays? outrageous

does "in the grays" refer to comments that never get posted? if so, i think about 8 out of the 10 gawker comments i've ever posted are stuck in the grays

and some of those were really awesome comments, trust me

they're posted, just invisible unless you click the "view all" or whatever

hey gawker dudes. how the fuck does kinja work?

tl;dr but i feel like forks is just mad cause he likes louis ck

Good thing no one wrote some poor journalism like this about Bill Cosby back in the 80s, he could have covered his tracks

When Maron interviewed CK recently, there was a brief moment of ass-covering-if-anything-comes-to-light in one line like "So, you've had an interesting relationship with women" or something like that. Which doesn't mean anything, but was noticeable.

gawker rage about yacht sex tape is too perfect

This stupid fucking article is a neckbeard hair away from screeching FREEDOM OF SPEECH PRIVATE LIFE because you repeatedly called your boss a kid fucker on Facebook

http://gawker.com/even-if-you-were-a-skinhead-your-employer-is-not-the-j-1776855060

cool tablecloth shirt

The very existence of someone you disagree with does not constitute assault. You are free to dislike your coworker; you may even feel unsafe due to your coworker’s personal beliefs; but you are not entitled to demand that they be removed from their job for something they did unrelated to work.

*thinking face emoji*

even by hammy noles troll standards that's some v tryhard shit

read that and grimaced a lot this morning

I feel like if you're a "public figure" or seen as a representative of your company in some way then yeah, firing you based on current actions outside of work is definitely a thing

interpreting your actions and whether you're a representative of your workplace is subjective

so what I'm saying is if I gain viral fame on the internet, I'm going to be careful not to do it while wearing a company logo t-shirt

yeah, according to hamilton nolan's argument this guy should be protected even if he was still racist. that is obviously not true, otherwise we would all be defending curt schilling.

vox has a right to protect its brand. this isn't like, he made some clumsy statements in the 80s. nazi skinheads used to roll around new york beating up minorities. even if he didn't do that he aligned himself with those sorts

maybe he needs a strong anti-racist personal #brand

i mean, it could be powerful if current skinheads (i read about some in greenpoint) were to hear about how shit they are from a former one. he could do a speaking tour, "racists against racism" or something idk

I think he's kind of out of the music and skinhead game, and that was already a thing years ago, and tbh the anti-racist skinheads would probably beat him up for horning in on their shtick

last I checked the anti-racist skinheads had the number one hobby of beating up racist skinheads but I am sure some wouldn't mind making an exception

feel like maybe there's a middle ground between 'believed heinous things in the past + fully repudiates it now' and 'believes heinous things + promotes it now'

definitely two different points here. if you did vile stuff in the past but are reasonable (or as reasonable as any writer for eater.com is) now, then who cares

if you're a dickhead outside of work and it reflects on your work or employer, it's a different thing

thankful my past is mostly socially semi-acceptable bad acts tbh

i believe in forgiveness but i also don't know that vox has to stand by this guy. they can speak more to his character today than i can, of course.

Is a nazi > used to be a nazi > has never been a nazi

Wait reverse those signs for the love of god

I was gonna say

i don't know what you guys are arguing about. im a jew kid that grew up punk and got fucked with by skins plenty. if i was running something and found out my #2 was a prominent skinhead in that scene AND is now an adult and still rocking a skin cut and fred perrys like this guy is (not exactly distancing yrself imo) then i'd be like peace out mfer.

xxp Is the love of god < used to be the love of god < has never been the love of god