I think no matter how you look at it, she's involved. GamerGate informed her and she started talking about it a lot, even putting @NintendoAmerica in her tweets to directly tell the company about her displeasure.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is Kotaku in danger of shutting down?
- Thread starter dex3108
- Start date
I think no matter how you look at it, she's involved. GamerGate informed her and she started talking about it a lot, even putting @NintendoAmerica in her tweets to directly tell the company about her displeasure.
lol
What happened to not needing to go deeper? That only apply when you get to have the last word?
None of this is new information. Despite that, I was going to address this post, but others have done so less derisively than I would at this point.
casinoman921
Member
Journalist here. If you don't want to be quoted in a story, just say "No comment." Don't go on a little mini-rant, because that makes it look like a comment.
Edit: Nothing wrong with Patrick's follow-up. That's what good investigative journalists do. Keep pressing. All Jaime had to do was "No comment."
Mikey Jr.
Member
Exactly, I'm with Patrick on this one.
Patrick did nothing wrong there. He made his position and intentions known, and communicated what was told to him accurately and fairly. The overall story, which was about Alison Rapp and how GamerGate managed to fool someone with some relevance into advocating her being fired, was more than worthwhile. If you don't want to be the subject of journalistic scrutiny, don't try to get a relatively well known figure fired, and don't go on a little rant to the journalist asking you questions.
The only thing wrong about Patrick's reply is that he doesn't capitalize his name in his signature.... My eye is twitching right now
mattiewheels
And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
I check out /kotakuinaction every now and then to brush up on what these guys are rambling about currently, and I just knew this story would be the big new flag-waver for them. It's funny to see who they choose to side with when it comes down to their politics, they seem like the kind of crowd that would bellyache about people calling Hogan a racist though. I missed out on their take on the Brietbart reporter though, I bet they threw that girl right under the bus just like Brietbart did.
Probably the worst shock jock of all. Stern and O&A hated him so much.
Heh...
'Murica
SolicitorPirate
Member
I honestly don't know who to cheer. Pretty much all parties directly involved are scumbags
On one hand, Gawker's sites have done some shady things, like Gizmodo's stunt at an entertainment expo that got them banned that they offered a non-apology for. On the other, despite some inane articles, I like Lifehacker's deals and app tips. I haven't read Kotaku in a long time. Hopefully the good ones can spin off.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
You don't have to cheer for anyone.
Just acknowledge that despite your misgivings about him, Hogan is clearly the one that should win this altercation and although it is an unfortunate thing that Kotaku will be involved in this crossfire, the decision to greatly punish Gawker for everything that it has done is ultimately the correct path to pursue.
MrCunningham
Member
Defy Media.
But really, is anyone out there really willing to invest in an an old-school monolithic gaming website these days? Especially when social media gaming outlets have steam rolled over this older format? Will anyone step up and buy them?
I feel like gaming media outlets have been slowly regressing and taking steps backwards out of the mainstream.
PastorOfMuppets
Banned
From what I've read, that's exactly what they have to do to pay this. In order to appeal, they have to place $50 million in escrow which they do not have. In order to pay, they'd need to liquidate their assets.
They can ask and get an exemption from the escrow requirement, it's just not automatic a stay on paying the whole amount like it would be if they had $50 mil.
Considering that Defy has gutted GameTrailers and has kept the name, there really wouldn't be much reason for them to make this move. While arguably GameTrailers is probably not as well known as Kotaku for 'news', the trend seems to be that they don't think there's a market for a content producer that focuses purely on games (with no other media focus, a la movies or comic books as seen with GameSpot).
I can almost feel that not even Hulk legal team expected this much coin or Gawker ineptitude.
The Hulk thing + the outing of the CFO of Count Nast + their vile comments about sex tapes of 4 year olds make me have very little sympathy for them.
Sorry for the people associated with that trash tho =/
But doesn't Kotaku cover all kind of "needy stuff"?
tedrotheredro
Member
I get that illegally publishing a sex tape, even one as skewed and racist as the Hulk Hogan tape, is wrong on many levels and that the company, executives, and editor-and-chief should be punished for not ceasing and desisting.
But $100 million is A LOT of money. A LOT. Over two times Gawker's gross annual revenue. Over ten times their annual profit. Obviously a lot more than they have in their bank account.
The judgement is essentially a death sentence to the entire corporation, with employees' livelihoods, contractors' and vendors' collection on debts to be determined. Almost none of these people had any choice about publishing the video. It affects far more people than just the editorial staff. People trying to raise kids and who don't write or care about sensational stories.
And all of it goes to Hulk Hogan. The racist, egotistical, swinger pro-wrestler gets ALL OF THEIR LIVELIHOODS.
Crazy times we live in. Even crazier that people defend the judgment because Gawker is scummy. As if the companies you've worked for were less scummy.
But $100 million is A LOT of money. A LOT. Over two times Gawker's gross annual revenue. Over ten times their annual profit. Obviously a lot more than they have in their bank account.
The judgement is essentially a death sentence to the entire corporation, with employees' livelihoods, contractors' and vendors' collection on debts to be determined. Almost none of these people had any choice about publishing the video. It affects far more people than just the editorial staff. People trying to raise kids and who don't write or care about sensational stories.
And all of it goes to Hulk Hogan. The racist, egotistical, swinger pro-wrestler gets ALL OF THEIR LIVELIHOODS.
Crazy times we live in. Even crazier that people defend the judgment because Gawker is scummy. As if the companies you've worked for were less scummy.
It's not his fault though.
MrCunningham
Member
The Defy Media part of my post was a joke. :V
Was Kotaku a profitable website? Did it generate enough traffic to make advertising revenue?
Come on now.
Gawker was particularly scummy.
Not to say there aren't worse companies, but this is hardly a "everybody do it" situation.
randomengine
Banned
The ideal outcome is that Hogan is made whole and Kotaku continues to exist. What Gawker did to Hogan was illegal and he should be made whole somehow.
How about?
Hogan gets his compensation.
Gawker goes out of business.
Hogan saves Kotaku by buying it.
This is the best timeline.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
Why? This was a breach of privacy. We aren't awarded rights only when we are nice people.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Why should Hogan get nothing? Just because he's an ass? That's now how justice works.
He should definitely win the case. The money he gets should go to charities as repentance for being a racist asshole. I have no sympathy for him or Gawker.
You must be a Hogan fan.
Glass Shark
Banned
If they can't survive I'm sure the writers will find work elsewhere. Patrick and Jason are too good at what they do to get passed over by other outlets. When I think of actual investigative reporting in this industry, they are the first and only names that come to mind.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
Unfortunately being a racist on your private time isn't a crime. Are there circumstances of him being publicly racist or does he at least have the tact to keep it to himself and the women he fucks?
diffusionx
Gold Member
Yea. I saw GGers reacting with glee at that thing and was just confused by it. I see nothing that Patrick did wrong.
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
Does it matter? It's not relevant.
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
It is completely unrelated though, it literally shouldn't even be considered.
Stevey
Member
Yeah, that's not gonna happen.
You're right it shouldn't. My opinion soured on him after discovering that however, and I can't unread that information. So in my ideal scenario, he'd donate all of the money he wins from the case to charity.
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
It's not like he needs the money either. It would be a nice gesture
Nick Denton posted a reply to the verdict.
He leaves out specifics about some of those witnesses that harmed Gawkers case (of which he is one), but overall I agree, this is a bad decision.
Will be interesting to see how the appeal goes.
He leaves out specifics about some of those witnesses that harmed Gawkers case (of which he is one), but overall I agree, this is a bad decision.
Will be interesting to see how the appeal goes.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
What? Yes it is. The guy was saying Hogan should get nothing in the case. Then retroactively said that it should be awarded to Hogan but given to charity.
All I'm saying is the case is overwhelmingly in his favor and he shouldn't be denied anything for practicing his freedom of speech, especially if it's in private. Freedom of speech doesn't mean speech without consequence but when it's in your private abode on your private time then that is your room to say whatever hateful thing comes to your mind.
You can lose friends, your can lose family, but here he has no room to lose that money. So, yes. It's relevant. Idk why you would be dismissive about that.
Edit: Well, after this tirade I re-read your post and realized I thought you were responding to something else. No it doesn't matter if he's ever been publicly racist. That was just my curiosity. Sorry for jumping on you, it's been a rough day... <3
Retroactive? If he gives it all to charity he got nothing monetarily. By getting nothing I mean he gets none of the money in the end. Granted he'd have to get the money to give it to charity, but we'd be talking semantics now.
I guess people are able to erase the memory of having read about his scandal or are willing to pretend he's not actually a racist asshole because he hasn't officially outed himself as a racist asshole. That's fine too. I'll state otherwise, this being a public forum and all.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
I was being an asshole and I'm sorry. I didn't understand your approach and felt passionate about the process. I'm not trying to pretend he isn't a racist, I'm just saying it was an invasion that taught us that in the first place and I'm putting myself in his shoes and thinking about an invasion of my own privacy. I don't know if I'd have anything comparable since I'm usually pretty compassionate, but the idea that I'd be punished for someone elses crime rubbed me the wrong way.
I was following the slippery slope fallacy. It was imagining where you draw the line and who's standards would be holding us accountable for what we think in our heads. Idk I'm sorry.
Why do people assume they don't care about the people. The site is garbage and should be dissolved.
AmaterasuOni
Banned
Necro update.
Gawker is done: http://www.thewrap.com/gawker-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy-after-140-million-hulk-hogan-verdict/
Gawker is done: http://www.thewrap.com/gawker-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy-after-140-million-hulk-hogan-verdict/
So, after the purchase by Univision, what does this mean for Kotaku?
It seems to mean Univision will continue to operate Kotaku in some capacity. What that capacity is, no one yet knows.