New York, 9:36 AM
Mon Nov 30
21 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip Your Editors:
tips@gawker.com
Tipline: 646-214-8138
Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder | Email
West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield | Email
Contributing Editors:
Valleywag:
Ryan Tate | Email
Media:
Hamilton Nolan | Email
Politics:
Alex Pareene | Email
Investigations:
John Cook | Email
Entertainment:
Brian Moylan | Email
Nights:
Adrian Chen | Email
Azaria Jagger | Email
Ravi Somaiya | Email
Weekends:
Foster Kamer | Email
Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley | Email
| posts about #adventuresinadvertising more → |
About That Vampire Blog Thing |
'Page Six' Mag: Can The Edit Deliver The Ads? |
Patrick Dempsey Shills For Conde Nast |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
Gawker 
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/26/09
The end of the post two days before the one referenced above has this nugget: "Seeing this truly brings a smile to my fanged face, and only further justifies the decision made by some very smart people to bring Bloodcopy - ah, wait I almost gave it away again, didn't I? No worries, I'll spill that secret soon enough."
A post on May 18 also has a vague allusion to "an exciting piece of news" and promises "more on that later."
One can jump to the conclusion that this was planned, then, at least four days in advance, and as such these teasers were, I assume, intended to be in the boxed ad-only sponsored posts? I don't mean to be accusatory, but something about this smells like Sex Panther.
05/26/09
@Gabriel Snyder: Huh? Is that what you said? As if you don't know what she's referring to, you slithering virus? I think what the lady is saying is that you are a slimy, corporate shill, who is making yet more excuses for Denton's inexcusable policies, coward. As someone that you fired at behest of your master, though I don't think you share his irrational fear of women, maybe you might want to cut the shit and answer her question.
And then you can answer why neither you nor Denton ever, not once, have contradicted me when I've accused him of breaking NYS labor law, and you of being the pup that yelps agreement. Since the last time I mentioned it in public, I've been informed that anyone can mention Gawker to the IRS and see what happens. Abandon ship, little rat.
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
And then you can answer why neither you nor Denton ever, not once, have contradicted me when I've accused him of breaking NYS labor law, and you of being the pup that yelps agreement. Since the last time I mentioned it in public, I've been informed that anyone can mention Gawker to the IRS and see what happens. Abandon ship, little rat.
05/26/09
05/26/09
If you went to J-School and you're going to try to convince me that you were really under the impression that Gawker bought a vampire blog for editorial purposes... implying that vampires are real... then I'd like to have that degree back, thx.
Also, all this "Gawker is unethical" crying, which Gawker have you been reading since, say, 2004? The leopard has spots! Outrage! More fart noises!
05/27/09
anyway, who wants to talk about how "syfy" network and gawker and launching a joint venture?!
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
My biggest problem with the flub up is the fact that instead of an ad invading Gawker's site, it was Gawker's brand itself that was used to burnish a product. Gawker could do snarky ad-purchased posts without any boxes or any warning for all I care: they'd let HamNo rape the subject and it would still be art. But letting the awful not-Rothko Gawker logo we all know and love travel to a publicity site is both poor taste and the wrong relationship between advertising and editorial content.
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
Because, yes, I am, and Tang would be just fine.
05/26/09
05/26/09
Note: not a paid endoresement.
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/27/09
05/27/09