|
Crazy Ted posted:Hahaha good lord Craggs decided to immolate everything and publish Gawker's brand-new "Brand Book" that they were using to sell themselves to potential advertisers. By his boss do you mean.... HITLER????  E: this is the source. Copernic fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jul 20, 2015 |
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:51 |
|
|
Copernic posted:By his boss do you mean.... HITLER???? Haha, oh lord
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Hahah Craggs is not a smart man.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Last Friday Nick Denton removes a post outing a gay man. This Friday Nick Denton starts rounding up all the Jews in New York City.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Copernic posted:By his boss do you mean.... HITLER???? holy poo poo 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Jesus loving Christ Craggs, know when to fold 'em already
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Tommy Craggs has successfully made noted sleaze Nick Denton the good guy. That's not easy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:56
|
|
Tater Love 
|
That seems like a reasonable analogy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Gawker and it's associated networks love playing the concerned citizen card when someone else fucks up and then doing the exact same poo poo. I'll browse a handful of their sites, and Deadspin is still required browsing for anyone in sports, but it ain't the gospel. I'm also waiting for Hamilton Nolan to tear Nick Denton apart Mortal Kombat-style in the middle of the street and forcibly distribute his wealth to the poor. Any day now I'm sure. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Keven. Just. Keven posted:Whys it bad to say he was attempting to pay for sex (crime) because it was gay sex. The real reason they did it was because he is an accountant for their chief business rival. They can say whatever they want about journalism, newsworthiness, firewalls between editors and sales, or any other high and mighty bullshit they dream up, but that is the real reason. Pretend Toyota outed a Honda exec because that is a more accurate analogy than anything the lunatics at Gawker think applies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Imagine if ESPN ran a super-serious OTL special about how one of the Fox Sports execs is an icky gay guy who is gay. That's pretty much what Gawker did to Conde Nast here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
Benne posted:Imagine if ESPN ran a super-serious OTL special about how one of the Fox Sports execs is an icky gay guy who is gay. That's pretty much what Gawker did to Conde Nast here. Great analogy. And just for fun, imagine the Gawker/Deadspin reaction if this happened hah
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Keven. Just. Keven posted:I mean I get why its a Bad Story (though basically on the level of everything gawker does) I just don't agree that there's some special protection he should get because it was a gay man. Basically either they ran the story because he works for a rival and they wanted to embarrass him, or because it was an exec wanting to have gay sex, or a combo of the two. If it's one of the last two he doesn't deserve special protection for being gay but he also doesn't deserve special singling out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
It's funny seeing them act like Gawker was some beacon of journalistic enlightenment. Most of their posts are just yanked from the front page of Reddit or whatever's trending on Twitter. If there's a funny bit from the Daily Show I'm sure it'll find it's way on there too. There is very little original reporting going on there. Didn't one of their former writers talk about how they'd spend 5 minutes writing up a story and 20 minutes figuring out the headline?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
Keven. Just. Keven posted:I mean I get why its a Bad Story (though basically on the level of everything gawker does) I just don't agree that there's some special protection he should get because it was a gay man. Gay people are routinely estranged from their families, friends, and churches; fired from, or not hired for, jobs; and targeted for violence. People stay closeted specifically because they believe there will be serious repercussions if they come out. People absolutely deserve protection from being outed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Not to mention that it's pretty scummy to help someone carry out a blackmail threat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
Is the formerly closeted gay dude a basketball or a race car driver or something? Why is this being talked about here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
Parody Threads posted:Is the formerly closeted gay dude a basketball or a race car driver or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:If it's on deadspin and it's not by Greg Howard, it's not worth reading. People actually like his writing?? Jeez. Their soccer coverage is awful I still can't believe what a mess that whole Conde Nast thing is. That was such a gross and pointless story even by Gawker standards. I am pretty surprised the writer didn't 'resign' as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
THE MACHO MAN posted:I am pretty surprised the writer didn't 'resign' as well. Gawker unionized a month and a half ago, so they couldn't unilaterally fire the writer (or Craggs, incidentally).
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
unless they bargained for that right wouldn't that mean poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Gawker employees are WGA members, so Gawker would have to build a case to show termination for cause and I believe WGA bylaws call for those types of cases to go to an arbitrator.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Stephen A Smith ✔@stephenasmith Where is all the noise about #BlackLivesMatter when black folks are killing black folks? 1:29 PM - 21 Jul 2015 well then
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Stephen A Smith ✔@stephenasmith makes u think
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Stephen A Smith ✔@stephenasmith Lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
THE MACHO MAN posted:That was such a gross and pointless story even by Gawker standards. I'm baffled how anyone could possibly think "public figure" even applied. Apparently the definition being used is "appears in public from time to time," under which we're all public figures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Stephen A Smith ✔@stephenasmith haha
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
He knows where his bread is buttered
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Stephen A Smith ✔@stephenasmith Interesting question, Stephen, thank you for asking
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
He's just going to keep doing that kind of stuff now that ESPN is letting half of their other personalities walk out the door
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:He's just going to keep doing that kind of stuff now that ESPN is letting half of their other personalities walk out the door He said women bring beatings upon themselves, then doubled down on it, then tripled down. Guy can pretty much say whatever he wants if that's any sign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I'm baffled how anyone could possibly think "public figure" even applied. Apparently the definition being used is "appears in public from time to time," under which we're all public figures. yeah apparently now public figure is anyone in an upper management position at any kind of business. Though the boner who wrote that tried to play up his brother's past connections to the government but I mean let's be real it's clear as day that it was a hit piece on a business rival since Reddit is a subsidiary of Conde Nast. The proof is in the headline: how does a random no-name executive get mentioned by name while the porn star (a far more public figure) isn't? Forget ethics, that's basic journalism stuff They could have published the same story without the disaster if they just went '(Porn star), a crazy rear end person, is trying to extort an unnamed business exec' and framed it that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
Why would it be a hit on a rival if the business was the one who decided to pull it? Wouldn't the business be supportive of it if that was the motivation?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
A hit piece is kind of silly too because you really can't do any more damage to Reddit than they already do to themselves. This is the place that gave birth to MRAs and actively defended the posting of child porn, and is now apparently collapsing in on itself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
Can Bill Barnwell be the guy who leaves at the end of the year? God he is going to inherit the NFL picks column isn't he? Also they really need to hire a podcaster to takeover the BS report already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
DJExile posted:A hit piece is kind of silly too because you really can't do any more damage to Reddit than they already do to themselves. This is the place that gave birth to MRAs and actively defended the posting of child porn, and is now apparently collapsing in on itself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Why would it be a hit on a rival if the business was the one who decided to pull it? Wouldn't the business be supportive of it if that was the motivation? It was Denton that ultimately yanked it, so it's the owner/publisher. But just because its not supported by the business side doesn't mean that it's not a hit piece on a business rival. All that means is Denton recognizes how unethical, petty, and damaging (to editorial and to advertising) that story was. Obviously we will never know whose idea it was for that and the discussion that took place, but it's absolutely not a coincidence that Gawker has published a mountain articles about how bad Reddit is in the past month, and then did that. They pull a massive amount of content from reddit and it's in their best interest to keep people from wanting to go to reddit. Editorial just masks this under the guise of social justice about redditors being racist. DJExile posted:A hit piece is kind of silly too because you really can't do any more damage to Reddit than they already do to themselves. This is the place that gave birth to MRAs and actively defended the posting of child porn, and is now apparently collapsing in on itself. of course you can damage a rivals brand, even reddit. Even with all of that poo poo the site still has a ton of viewers and posters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
DJExile posted:A hit piece is kind of silly too because you really can't do any more damage to Reddit than they already do to themselves. This is the place that gave birth to MRAs and actively defended the posting of child porn, and is now apparently collapsing in on itself. It's pretty bad how long it took for mainstream media to notice what a cesspool that place is instead of just gleefully hyping the celebrity AMA threads
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
Intruder posted:He knows where his bread is buttered Bread, not toast, since toast is darker than bread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:51 |
|
|
More inside baseball Gawker stuff if you want it. quote:"There are dirty deals being done all over the place," Denton said. "Your attitude, your naïveté when it comes to that and then outrage when you discover that actually that’s how the world works, it’s sort of natural and it’s sort of a function of where we are as a company."
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 16:20
|
|