The End of the Gawker Gotcha
July 20, 2015 4:39 PM   Subscribe

In a post published last Thursday night [story removed], Gawker claimed to have evidence that [name and info redacted by mods] had attempted to pay a gay porn star $2,500 for sex.

The reception was extremely negative and New York City media twitter largely held its nose in disgust. Just after the post went live, Gawker's Editor-in-Chief Max Read tweeted a typically Gawker defense.

After a vote from Gawker's managing partnership early Friday, the post was removed less than 24 hours after being published. Then, this morning, news broke that both EIC Max Read and Executive Editor Tommy Craggs were resigning over the decision to pull the piece amid other internal squabbling. Gawker has frequently been the site to publish takedowns of people in power, so why is this case any different? There will undoubtedly be more takes in the future, but there is a possibility that the internet is outgrowing the Gawker mindset.
posted by Spiced Out Calvin Coolidge (8 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Seems like it would be better to do this without naming the guy? -- LobsterMitten



 
On second thought, probably not.

See also: the essential Today in Tabs if you need more butter for your popcorn.
posted by Spiced Out Calvin Coolidge at 4:42 PM on July 20, 2015


Gawker is awful so this fight between executives and editorial seems like a reverse Aliens-vs-Predator. Whoever loses, we win.

I came for the article and stayed for the posted emails. That's one way to burn bridges.
posted by Justinian at 4:47 PM on July 20, 2015


Heh. I just read about this and came here to see if anyone had posted it. I look forward to the discussion.
posted by brundlefly at 4:47 PM on July 20, 2015


1. Not a public figure.
2. No record of being against any gay rights.
3. No indication about his relationship arrangements.
4. Editorial staff strongly objects to removal of story.
5. Smear campaign clickbait assholes.
posted by xingcat at 4:48 PM on July 20, 2015 [4 favorites]


Oh FFS. Revealing the name of this individual is fucked up. Gawker banned the post; why the hell is this allowed?
posted by urbanwhaleshark at 4:49 PM on July 20, 2015 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I was aware of this story, but hadn't seen the man's name in print until right this very post.
posted by 4th number at 4:50 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]


This could be an interesting post about the Gawker shitshow without the outing. Hope someone makes that post when this one goes away.
posted by padraigin at 4:51 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]


That is one of the least newsworthy things I've ever heard of.
posted by Miko at 4:52 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]


« Older Star Max   |   Al Gore's Satellite Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments