They've been like that for years. I had to stop reading Gizmodo because it turned from actual news about tech to whatever the narcissistic staff felt like.
How are posts like that at all relevant? I mean I'd rather read The Verge than what these people are putting out. The bias that Gawker had is that of a crazy person. They always told us that they were there for the people delivering hard evidence, but meanwhile give a damn about a person's rights to privacy, AND THEN CELEBRATED THAT FACT.
Check out Gawker's defunct site as it stands now. It's a dumpster fire that points fingers at everyone but themselves.
Journalists don't exist to represent the interests of maverick billionaires. That's what PR firms are for. Tesla's was very successful for a long time. Now that's changing. This is a good and natural function of a working democracy.
This is a report by a recurring contributor to the publication which contextualises a news peg with other events relevant to the peg. Whatever your semantic disagreements with the contemporary tone of web-based reporting, this is textbook journalism.
No, this is an opinion piece and its first paragraph literally begins with criticism of the company. It also uses the phrase "everyone was right all along". First of all, who is 'everyone' and since when has everyone agreed on anything? This is far from journalism...this is a thinly veiled opinion piece and a poorly written one at that.
Constant hit-piece after hit-piece.
They've burned any facade of objectivity, with the tone and repetitiveness of their reporting.