Well I think we (or at least I) really do owe the commenters and readers something. I'm not sure what exactly but, you know, I feel a real fondness for all the people here that I spent two endless years of my life with. (So, a Christmas letter at least.) Even the annoying ones. Maybe especially the annoying ones.

But then, I'm a man (as far as you—and I—know!), so I get treated better on the internet.

Anyway, this didn't happen.

Whatever, I'm about to be late for a JOB INTERVIEW.

@MisterHippity: Ha, nah. This just didn't happen.

See, on Wednesday, Denton gets to write a post about how Emily's book didn't sell for enough money. This is the perfect undermining rumor to put out there and then retract! Rile up the jealous and the ambitious and everyone else—and then no one minds when he stabs her later.

Or at least that's how I'd play it. Heh.

Still. This is not an example of anyone going to school with someone, or anyone commissioning anyone, or anyone getting a book contract. In suggesting that this is one of those cases, Denton, you're actually implying something even worse than the item already does!

This is not an item of gossip, it's an item of innuendo. And it's not posted as an innuendo because you can't print the truth, which, Lord knows we've all done—it's innuendo because you actually don't know the truth. Was Emily or was she not engaged in a romantic relationship when she interviewed Keith? Denton's recasting of this particular item as "invaluable social information" is hysterical, because it is not actually information. (That sort of language, by the way, is also one of the legal department's talking points.)

The result of items like this is that the innuendo becomes fact. See the comment above: "There is no division between her life and her work." That's actually heading into some pretty dicey territory, I think. It's also not true, and your disregard for the facts behind the innuendo are at fault that readers believe that.

And Denton, I can't believe that you're suggesting I don't believe that Gawker has as its goal the very premise you define here. Of course that's Gawker's job! But your Emily campaign has an extremely suspect tone and manner to it.

AND they couldn't even get Racer X's costume fitted properly! It's like he's wearing some pleather bean-bags cobbled together! It gathers and wrinkles where it shouldn't and it does HORRIBLE things to his ass. It doesn't help that Matthew Fox has decided to interpret the character FROM BEYOND THE GRAVE either. Jesus. Um okay done now, sorry.

And maybe a little scared, actually.

Richard, you may agree now, but let's talk in six months.

Annnnd now back to having a life.

And he did have three sources—he had a small fleet of reporter kids with him, getting people's phone numbers outside, as explained in the article.

And so, if your pay rate was artificially inflated to keep you getting paid at a decent rate on less traffic, now it will be cut down to the more "reasonable" rate of other sites.

The giant flaw in this is, in the words of one psych prof: "The psychological impact of losing something is about 2.5 times as great as the psychological impact of gaining the same thing." And I don't think the company understands that employees react badly to uncertainty and to things that seem unfair, even if on paper they are completely logical.

But then, corporations aren't here to hold their (probably illegal) non-employee-status employees' hands. They have a business to run. Your happiness isn't their first concern.

A change in business strategy, perhaps, actually.

Anyway: Apparently Newser.com is still online! Now that's gumption.

That may be the single worst thing I've ever heard from a public relations professional (and that's saying something). It is also utter bullshit and it betrays the twisted operating principle behind how he treats and regards reporters and journalism.

Jesus, do I have to Fedex all of you some notepads or pens or something? Don't you all have laptops plugged in? We're not all there, do some bloody stenography for the rest of us already.

But. Bad news. Maybe that disgusting Tucker Carlson was right, when he told hero 'Scotsman' reporter Gerri Peev (she's the one who saved us from Samantha Power, Obama's future minister of defense!) the other day that standards of journalism are "dramatically lower" in Great Britain. I rather thought he should have been fired over that but now surely we all must reconsider.