It didn't look like Hogan's would either. But he got the right judge in the right town to hear it. That's how this one's setting up, too.
-
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.
Gawker has been gone for a year. Weve never needed it more than now. (WaPo)
- Thread starter ryseing
- Start date
It didn't look like Hogan's would either. But he got the right judge in the right town to hear it. That's how this one's setting up, too.
I get that concern. Hell, I have that concern.
But, this thinking veers into revisionism. Gawker didn't lose simply because Thiel bankrolled the Hogan case. They made several idiotic decisions before and throughout the legal battle.
Other outlets who don't behave like dipshits and don't have a history of shady practices in their reporting would find it difficult to be ruled against no matter how much money the other side throws at it.
Westbahnhof
Banned
Sarcastic Poster
Member
Yeah, they've been an absolutely terrible influence on modern journalism.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Yeah I know. I was quoting it to show they were assholes about more than just Hogan.
CarlisleDavid1979
Member
Nope. It isn't missed.
I agree they left the media landscape a shittier place, but that neither means it was good to have around, nor does it mean it was bad when it finally went away.
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
What a thread backfire. Lol.
Westbahnhof
Banned
Ah, I thought you responded to both with one statement, sorry.
But yeah. Thiel financing the whole thing is a bit iffy, but I won't shed a tear for Gawker.
Yup.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
There are plenty of outlets that do good work right now without delving into the bullshit that Gawker has. Teen Vogue has more integrity than that site.
Gawker did some innovative stuff, but they were cocky and doubled down on tons of terrible articles and takes. While I probably miss Gawker more than I am happy it's gone, the arrogance of that staff in not acknowledging some of their own culpability in their own downfall is borderline cultish.
There have been so many Gawker alumni on Twitter today retweeting this article with maudlin, self congratulatory sentiments about how great Gawker was. Incredibly tiresome, especially considering Splinter News is probably going to be pretty much the same damn site.
This video of an editor defending the Gawker Stalker map and getting pwned by Jimmy Kimmel was particularly satisfying, even today.
There have been so many Gawker alumni on Twitter today retweeting this article with maudlin, self congratulatory sentiments about how great Gawker was. Incredibly tiresome, especially considering Splinter News is probably going to be pretty much the same damn site.
This video of an editor defending the Gawker Stalker map and getting pwned by Jimmy Kimmel was particularly satisfying, even today.
Flying Toaster
Member
Gawker was a perfect example of the blogger/journalist method of journalism that is chaotic and horrible. There was never really any reason for a platform like Gawker to exist when we should be focusing more on constructive journalism instead of blogged opinion pieces.
Print journalism is dying but that does not mean that the ethics and rules should die with it. A hybrid form of either video/audio like a podcast tied into a online service that has full featured articles and structured like a traditional newspaper with technological updates is what we need. NPR/NYT hybrid.
FriskyrumX
Banned
Gawker deserves the drive-bys and to be left in a void. That's all there is to it.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Fuck Gawker. Scummy, unethical pieces of shit.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
And we are done.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
GAF's hatred for Gawker is amazing.
The site practically invented modern online journalism. It infused it with opinion, scorn for elites, vulgarity, allowed authors to tackle weird and idiosyncratic beats and produced some great writing.
Its alumni are everywhere: NYT (Hell one is the lead editor on the style section), New York Mag, Slate, The Outline, Splinter, New Yorker, Wired, Etc.
It informs everything you read today. Its changed political discourse for the better and worse. Its style guide was way ahead of other online outlets and practically invented (at least formalized in a leading outlet)online writing as we know it today. and Its unionization drive helped unionize many other online magazines.
The "fuck gawker" crowd likes to hype up misguided and a few ethically dubious articles as representative of the entire site and every article they published. If we're going to cast sins on an entire enterprise because of a few mistakes (Conde Nast chiefly) why don't we still shame the NYT for helping kill half a million in iraq, needlessly hyping and partnering with far rightwing hacks with their "clinton cash" articles, their misrepresentation of the clinton email story (that gawker first broke), etc. All far more damaging reporting than anything Gawker ever did.
Why do we continue to post Daily Beast articles after they posted that Olympic Gay Outing story? We seem to not feel that's representative.
Gawker hate, too often seems to be a performative "I'm a decent person" act a lot of the time. A way to say "I'm not with those people." It doesn't attempt to grapple with the complexities, sins and highlights of a media outlet that existed for almost 15 basically created a new form of journalism. It presents a crude inaccurate picture to slander.
RIP
The site practically invented modern online journalism. It infused it with opinion, scorn for elites, vulgarity, allowed authors to tackle weird and idiosyncratic beats and produced some great writing.
Its alumni are everywhere: NYT (Hell one is the lead editor on the style section), New York Mag, Slate, The Outline, Splinter, New Yorker, Wired, Etc.
It informs everything you read today. Its changed political discourse for the better and worse. Its style guide was way ahead of other online outlets and practically invented (at least formalized in a leading outlet)online writing as we know it today. and Its unionization drive helped unionize many other online magazines.
The "fuck gawker" crowd likes to hype up misguided and a few ethically dubious articles as representative of the entire site and every article they published. If we're going to cast sins on an entire enterprise because of a few mistakes (Conde Nast chiefly) why don't we still shame the NYT for helping kill half a million in iraq, needlessly hyping and partnering with far rightwing hacks with their "clinton cash" articles, their misrepresentation of the clinton email story (that gawker first broke), etc. All far more damaging reporting than anything Gawker ever did.
Why do we continue to post Daily Beast articles after they posted that Olympic Gay Outing story? We seem to not feel that's representative.
Gawker hate, too often seems to be a performative "I'm a decent person" act a lot of the time. A way to say "I'm not with those people." It doesn't attempt to grapple with the complexities, sins and highlights of a media outlet that existed for almost 15 basically created a new form of journalism. It presents a crude inaccurate picture to slander.
RIP
Its not and it can't be because its subsumed under univision and the whims of saben.
This is nonsense. It's not online because of judge and jury in florida who rendered a bad verdict and peter thiel's quest for vengence. Otherwise it would still exist. Reviled? Maybe the staff is to blame for that but its not the reason for its downfall.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Nope. Gawker was shit and Trump throws out enough incriminating garbage on his own. It wouldn't be worth the trade off.
MegaManTrigger
Banned
Gawker is a piece of shit site that should never be uttered in the same sentence as those with credibility, such as NYT, WaPo, etc. I'm glad they're finished. They thought a video of a woman getting raped was newsworthy so they can go fuck right off into hell for all I care.
You act as if Gawker is on the same level as NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, etc., but when have we ever seen those legitimate news sources do what Gawker did? (aka willingly post rape video of a girl despite calls from family to shut it down, out a man's sexual orientation against his request, post celebrity sex tape and then act defiantly when a judge ordered them to shut it down vs. the hypocritical stance of getting mad at anyone who distributed JLaw nudes). You're completely forgetting that NYT, WaPo, etc. have journalism standards whereas Gawker seems to think journalism is the Wild West.
Furthermore, everyone keeps parroting this silly slippery slope concern and yet there doesn't seem to be an increase in news media being legally targeted by billionaires/mega rich people.
You act as if Gawker is on the same level as NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, etc., but when have we ever seen those legitimate news sources do what Gawker did? (aka willingly post rape video of a girl despite calls from family to shut it down, out a man's sexual orientation against his request, post celebrity sex tape and then act defiantly when a judge ordered them to shut it down vs. the hypocritical stance of getting mad at anyone who distributed JLaw nudes). You're completely forgetting that NYT, WaPo, etc. have journalism standards whereas Gawker seems to think journalism is the Wild West.
Furthermore, everyone keeps parroting this silly slippery slope concern and yet there doesn't seem to be an increase in news media being legally targeted by billionaires/mega rich people.
ElRenoRaven
Member
Yea nah. Gawker was always trash. We have sites that are of a higher quality then they ever were and we had those before they died too.
TheCochese
Banned
I see you got the Gawker DF batsignal.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Wow you're really not helping your case here.
CornBurrito
Member
How is Peter Thiel so successful then?
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I think we should strive to hope for something better than...Gawker.
Westbahnhof
Banned
Yeah, I get all my news from journalist Peter Thiel
NYCmetsfan
Banned
You've also not put forward an argument why those things are bad. Which is what I'm assuming your doing here
I'm glad you responded to any of the points and feel everyone must share in the same opinion.
dark_chris
Gold Member
Yep, if anything it would help solidify Trump's "Fake news" rhetoric.
TheCochese
Banned
This is like the sixth or seventh thread, so feel free to go back to where we addressed how shitty they were then.
Because you've posted more or less the same thing every time.
MegaManTrigger
Banned
Couldn't have said it any better. Fuck Gawker.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Ok, how about this:
If Gawker invented "opinion, scorn for elites, vulgarity, allowed authors to tackle weird and idiosyncratic beats", then it indirectly lead to the rise of opinion-driven hyperbolic clickbait drivel like Breitbart and Infowars.
Atom Heart Mother
Banned
blackmailing and digging into people's lives is modern online journalism? it was an online version of those shitty magazines you saw in the supermarkets with eye catching stories.
gawker had it coming for acting so cocky
I'm not acting if it is on the same level, but i warn you this goes towards what fascism is. It starts with one, than the next block will fall after that.
It is simple when you shut one down the next can go down also like i said before you don't when it is going to happen but when it does happen it will be a bigger shock across every single journalist,website or channel. They can sue anyone for anything and it can lead up to censorship that is the goal they want to achieve. You need to think further even if it is gawker not seeing the wider spectrum that is a very dangerous path this will go.
Univision bought them up.
A judge told us to take down our Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Post, we didn't
Or
Gawker's defense acted as though the whole proceedings from Hogan and the FL courtroom were beneath them and got blindsided into oblivion, and I say this as a fan of Gawker that wishes they were still around. However, I hate the whitewashing of the fact that they didn't take active steps to bungle their own defense. If your blog's gimmick is going to be edgy and risk taking, you better cover your damn bases. Gawker didn't.
PSlayer
Member
This pretty much sums up.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Can journalism be improved? Absolutely. When Teen Vogue has more courage to call out Trump than your average CNN journalist we shouldn't be looking towards desperation like bringing back Gawker. You just gotta get better.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I'm asking in all seriousness.
How is the NYT more credible, by any objective measure than Gawker?
They made perhaps the worst journalistic error of this century, hyping up the Iraq war. They also made horrible ethically dubious decisions that helped paved the way for Trump.
They hire people on their op-ed pages who outright lie and misrepresent basic facts and praise this as "diversifying."
They hired Jayson Blair. They've downplayed the Holocaust, hid stories of national importance to please the powers that be (NSA), wrote slanderous articles about nail salons (including mistranslated things)
None of this is to say one shouldn't believe the Times or its not credible but Gawker's sins we not credibility, and It'd likely come out far and ahead on the credibility side.
The Greek Freak
Member
Yup, Hogan is a racist shit bag but Gawker did some fucking vile shit that has no place in journalism or even the minimum for human decency.
- Outing a competitors exec as gay when they knew he was in a country where that was punishable by death.
- Refusing to take down video of a girl being sexually assaulted after she asked repeatedly.
- Dozens of other garbage actions but those are the two worst.
Fuck Gawker, I'm sad the people running it didn't get fucked harder.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Teen Vogue, MTV, Vice. we got plenty of alternatives.
Pyrrhus
Member
You know, maybe if the head of Gawker hadn't felt compelled to make a joke about leaking sex tapes of four-year-olds while in a deposition Gawker would still be around to shotgun feces from its worthless cloaca. Gawker's brand of flippant, nihilistic cynicism is not the antidote we need to the Trump era.
122 Pulitzer Prizes objective enough?
You need to step away from the keyboard for a bit.
benicillin
Banned
Yeah I mean, maybe the author should give props to the outlets who are really doing work and not the defunct tabloid factory that was too reckless and cocky for its own good.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This again????
1) They took down the tape.
2) They didn't take down the words
3) The judge had no credible or constitutional basis for which to order them to do 2).
4) Multiple federal judges stated that the posting of the tape and text were constitutionally protected by the 1st amendment and the judge was in error as she was ordering prior restraint on speech.
And the AJ quote was from a deposition and was a flippant, disgusting response. I don't need to defend AJ's jokes. They were not "gawker"
I'm the biggest defender of the Free press you'll find but yeah, fuck Gawker. It belongs in the gutter.