
Gawker has been gone for a year. We’ve never needed it more than now - a_w
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/08/22/gawker-has-been-gone-for-a-year-weve-never-needed-it-more-than-now/
======
seabird
All of this sanguine Gawker romanticism is asinine. The site's writers mostly
consisted of cut-rate fresh grads without the common sense to not violently
shoot their livelihoods in the head with a figurative 12 gauge shotgun. It
would help if the people calling the shots weren't this same kind of stupid.

Gawker was glad to play in the Big Boy Leagues until the Big Boys got
involved, after which they screamed about "suppressing independent media" and
acting like they never did any wrong. The constant attempts to blame
Thiel/Hulk Hogan border on comedy. They don't seem to want to accept that
their flagrant violation of somebody's privacy is what led to their fairly
messy death, and not somebody else being the lesser person in an argument.

I don't understand how anybody could think Gawker's swill would be at all
helpful in arguing against Donald Trump's presidency. It's the exact same
reporting that turned a lot of people on to him in the first place.

------
naturalgradient
I am cringing when journalists write about their noble profession when
frequently, they lose all critical distance and have become activists.

'Gawker began as a crusade to save journalism'. Sure.

When even outlets which like to think of themselves as flag-bearers for
critical journalism can barely go a week without severely misrepresenting
content, I have little compassion left (example: Guardian calling the Google
memo an 'anti-diversity' memo
[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/08/google-
fi...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/08/google-fires-author-
anti-diversity-memo)).

In recent months, I have felt that any HN discussion has more editorial
integrity than even the 'best' newspapers. Users call each other out. Nobody
seems to call each other out on substandard work in professional newsrooms.
Only after the shitstorm passes, the same people who made it happen like to
talk about how 'the media' overreacted.

------
Dirlewanger
>we might consider what we lost [...] its proudly independent sensibility and
critical autonomy remain rare in today’s corporate media sphere.

Um, _what?_ The Gawkers/Buzzfeeds/etc. are one of the many reasons general
discourse has deteriorated so much. They've effectively forced "today's
corporate media spheres" to become Gawker-lites because that horeshit is the
only thing people read.

>All that’s really left to say is that Gawker is gone and that Donald Trump is
president.

Gawker stayed in business because of people like Trump. He's in the White
House because of independent outlets like Gawker.

I can't believe a supposed professor of journalism wrote this turgid shit.

------
Overtonwindow
This is the second Gawker apologist link to reach the front page today. Is
there some kind of coordinated campaign PR campaign to reboot the Gawker
model? I certainly hope not. Journalists should be impartial, unbiased,
nonpartisan, and report facts that is actual news, not gossip. I'm not saying
a person is not entitled to their opinion just because they're a journalist,
but don't try to pass off your personal opinion as news simply because you're
a journalist.

------
petraeus
Gawker is dead, long live Gawker!

