

Gawker, How Dare You - thinker
http://www.diycouturier.com/post/50749002281/fuck-you-gawker

======
micro571
How much economic damage has Rob Ford done while being the bumbling mayor of
Toronto the last few years?

Richard Florida, the urban studies theorist has called Rob Ford "the worst
mayor in the modern history of cities and the most anti-urban mayor ever to
preside over a large global city.".

This is hardly an isolated incident. Anyone who has follow Toronto politics is
well aware of the numerous scandals and antics of Rob Ford. Read the Conflict
of Interest trial and Other Controversies portions of his wikipedia article.

$200k is well worth it to further expose that he is unfit to run a city the
size and importance of Toronto, Canada's largest city.

How much is the drug trade worth in Toronto? 10's of millions or more. $200k
is a blip on the radar. It's unfortunate that this money has to be paid to
unsavory characters, but it's a small price to pay.

Toronto could be much greater than it is. Toronto deserves a better mayor.

------
themstheones
I think the outrage is a bit misplaced here. On one hand you have the elected
leader of one of the most populous regions in Canada, representing more people
than many of the premiers do. He lacks the credibility and leadership to even
directly address the accusations, instead hiding behind a single-word shrug
off.

The (alleged) dealers are being opportunistic with what is potentially a very
valuable asset. They're acting pretty exactly as you'd expect. Unless you
spend all your time outraged that drug dealers exist, it makes more sense to
be outraged that the mayor is stalling instead of responding.

------
canthonytucci
I would contest that exposing corruption, even if it requires paying off some
unsavory people, is a form of "lifesaving research".

~~~
obviouslygreen
That's a bit of a stretch, I'd say. In this specific case, unless the mayor's
tenure is actually benefiting drug crime more than a $200,000 cash infusion
would, I don't see how this could be a net positive.

If it were a matter of "give an illegal bribe to an aide who filmed something
illegal being done by an already-corrupt official," that would be different.
It's still not "life-saving research" unless that corruption is actually
costing lives, but it fits with your argument.

I don't think that's what's going on here. The author seems right on target:
They're trying to do something that will incidentally (but obviously) fund a
whole lot more harm than it's likely to save.

~~~
canthonytucci
If we think about it as an isolated case then I completely agree.

However, I think that if we can get this video out there, it might help start
a discussion about corruption "raise awareness" and all that kind of hard to
measure stuff.

My feeling is that the positive is that this doesn't just go away because a
couple of people weren't compelled to do the right thing and just release the
video. It's not a totally clean victory having to pay these guys, but IMHO
well worth it.

Then again, maybe people just don't care, see: Marion Barry.

Edit: toned it down a little.

------
yardie
Gawker paid like $5000 to get the prototype iPhone4. That is $5000 in an
industry worth millions for component and accessories makers.

Whoever these guys are I think they severely overestimate the worth of their
material. A prototype might be worth $200k a video of the mayor might be worth
half of that.

~~~
advisedwang
Yeah but it's not $200k of their own money...

~~~
lambersley
I would donate my $20 if I didn't think Mayor Rob Ford is going to by the
video first.

------
danso
So the $200,000 is going, ostensibly, to help the miscreant videographers get
the duck out of Fodge, which, let's face it, is a pretty sensible concern
after you've exposed a mayor with drug trade connections. Paying sources is
not a widely accepted practice in journalism, but if the video is legit, it's
hard to argue that this isn't worthwhile journalism...besides the associated
health risks, a mayor who thinks he can flout laws that he would have no
problem punishing his own citizens with is not a tenable situation for one of
North America's most major cities.

The self-righteousness of the OP is also just a bit much:

> _Do you - gawker editors, managers, owners - have ANY IDEA what I could do
> with $200K? Do you know what kind of lifesaving research that could pay for?
> Do you know how much fresh fruit that could put in elementary schools in our
> impoverished neighborhoods?_

Well, considering the OP works in public policy...he/she should know the
answers to both: not very much. There's 250,000 students in the Toronto
system...even if the target population here is just a few thousand
students...$200K would barely buy a year's supply of fresh fruit.

The school board is, I'm assuming, outside the jurisdiction of the Mayor's
office...and yet mayoral policy could have a great effect, beneficial or
detrimental, to the citizenry. Will deposing a ostensibly corrupt mayor fix
things? Probably not. But to say such an outcome is not at all relevant to
what the OP cares about seems a little short-sighted.

------
rhizome
Eh, Gawker is kinda bottom of the barrel, if they declined the offer maybe the
people with the video would get frustrated and/or bored and just post it to
WSHH or YT or whatever.

------
patrocles
centre? lol You must not be American. We're busy complaining about the DoJ,
IRS, and two administrations that don't have control of their bureaucracies.

You know, the things that matter in American Democracy. ;)

~~~
spiek
Did you read the article? This is an article about a Canadian issue. In
Canada. Your comment is almost entirely irrelevant.

