• Profile logout login

#media#rootinccompanyhistoryhtml

Gawker

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #stalker,
  • #opencaption,
  • #internalmemos,
  • etc.

New York, 12:20 PM
Wed Nov 11
55 posts in the last 24 hours

Team

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

Weekends:
Foster Kamer | Email

Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley | Email

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
4260 Subscribers
Gawker
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of Monte Wooley Monte Wooley
    11:45 AM

    In reply to The New Yorker, by the Numbers
    Bloated staff, unreadable magazine. No wonder Si loves it. So Proustian. A remembrance of things past. Tiny mummies live! #thenewyorker
     Reply
    Monte Wooley was starred Monte Wooley was unstarred
    Image of lionel-mandrake lionel-mandrake
    12:01 PM

    @Monte Wooley: Unreadable? You're not saying very much about yourself, are you? #thenewyorker
     Reply
    lionel-mandrake was starred lionel-mandrake was unstarred
    Image of FormerEnglishMajor FormerEnglishMajor
    11:31 AM

    In reply to The New Yorker, by the Numbers
    What is the ratio of writers to editors at other magazines? Is 2:1 a lot or the industry norm? (unless critics are considered writers as well, in which case it's 2.5 to 1).

    And could someone, ANYONE, please explain to a non-journo what the difference is between a "copy staff" and an "editorial assistant"? #thenewyorker
     Reply
    FormerEnglishMajor was starred FormerEnglishMajor was unstarred
    Image of naugahydeinplainsight naugahydeinplainsight
    11:23 AM

    In reply to The New Yorker, by the Numbers
    Six with "makeup" in their titles but seven with "web," plus a blogs editor and a multimedia producer. Go, go Eustace! #thenewyorker
     Reply
    naugahydeinplainsight was starred naugahydeinplainsight was unstarred
    Image of Baroness Baroness
    11:08 AM

    In reply to The New Yorker, by the Numbers
    They need a lot of makeup- have you seen those ghastly pale lit-nillas? #thenewyorker
     Reply
    Baroness was starred Baroness was unstarred
    Image of manchops manchops
    11:07 AM

    In reply to The New Yorker, by the Numbers
    wow, the weird part is I know someone who freelances there three days a week as a researcher and she's not even on that masthead!
    I do worry about the timeliness of publishing this thing right now though. I worry for everyone in magazine's jobs. #thenewyorker
     Reply
    manchops was starred manchops was unstarred
    Image of If_I_Had_a_Poodle If_I_Had_a_Poodle
    11:21 AM

    @manchops: Jobs? At magazines? #thenewyorker
     Reply
    If_I_Had_a_Poodle was starred If_I_Had_a_Poodle was unstarred
    Image of Tremonius Tremonius
    11:52 AM

    @If_I_Had_a_Poodle: There used to be magazines. It's hard to imagine how it was then.

    Fitzgerald in The Saturday Evening Post; Hemingway in True, the Man's Magazine; Isaac Asimov writing for Playboy; Carl Sagan a regular in Parade. Everybody with gravitas back then traded it in for the huge numbers reached by the pop press.

    Now both gravitas and numbers are gone. Isn't there a Greek tragedy on this feature? #thenewyorker
     Reply
    Tremonius was starred Tremonius was unstarred
    Image of lionel-mandrake lionel-mandrake
    12:03 PM

    @Tremonius: There still are jobs at magazines, just not at Nast or Hachette. #thenewyorker
     Reply
    lionel-mandrake was starred lionel-mandrake was unstarred
    Image of adiam7 adiam7
    09:49 AM

    In reply to Scientology Seeks Investigative Journalists for a Potential Media Fight-Back
    I clicked on that damn Freedom link and now I am fucked for the day. This little nugget is priceless:
    In the most offensive gesture of all, the S.P. Times refused to accept an offer of an in-person interview with Mr. David Miscavige, the ecclesiastical leader of the Scientology religion.

    I know they wanted to write that part in all caps I just know it.

    I clicked on the human rights button and no one else should. Ever.

    HUMANITARIAN AND SOCIAL PROGRAMS:
    The Church of Scientology's Planetary Social Betterment Campaigns

    I am going to click:
    PECIAL REPORT INSIDE THE S.P. TIMES:
    Merchants of Chaos

    If I make it out of there I will report my findings #scientology
     Reply
    adiam7 was starred adiam7 was unstarred
    Image of adiam7 adiam7
    09:42 AM

    In reply to Scientology Seeks Investigative Journalists for a Potential Media Fight-Back
    If you all were a bit more worldly you would know that the Tampa Bay area is a hotbed of human rights issues. I believe that the UNHRC is also moving their headquarters there. I have heard that Angelina Jolie is going to visit the displaced persons camp there. It is the epicenter and Scientology is all over them. #scientology
     Reply
    adiam7 was starred adiam7 was unstarred
    Image of Unsolicited Advice Unsolicited Advice
    09:40 AM

    In reply to Warning Signs of the Fort Hood Killer Were Missed, Still Not Clear
    How lovely that the FBI, CIA, NSA, et al have finally learned to cooperate in the years since 9/11. I'm looking forward to our sprawling bureaucracies once again being exposed for grand mal incompetence. #media
     Reply
    Unsolicited Advice was starred Unsolicited Advice was unstarred
    Image of BunnySkull BunnySkull
    08:20 AM

    In reply to Scientology Seeks Investigative Journalists for a Potential Media Fight-Back
    They've already attempted to do a hit piece against the St. Pete paper and the reporter/editor who the did the investigative piece on the cult. You can read it in the new "Freedom" mag online and it truly makes your skin crawl. I haven't read such obvious skewed propaganda since Goebbels' "Der Angriff." Only Dr. Goebbel's was far more subtle.
     Reply
    Edited by BunnySkull at 11/11/09 8:31 AM BunnySkull was starred BunnySkull was unstarred
    Image of senatormayer senatormayer
    07:47 AM

    In reply to Scientology Seeks Investigative Journalists for a Potential Media Fight-Back
    For some reason (and tell me if this sounds crazy) I think we should either shoot all the Scientologists into the Sun, or in the back of the head. They're both fairly harsh, but I've got a prejudice against them that makes it feel justified.

    Also, it makes me immensely happy to learn that "Scientologists" isn't recognized as a word by my computer. Thank you either Microsoft or Firefox.
     Reply
    Edited by senatormayer at 11/11/09 7:48 AM senatormayer was starred senatormayer was unstarred
    Image of It's twue! It's twue! It's twue! It's twue!
    09:25 AM

    @senatormayer: into the sun. #scientology
     Reply
    senatormayer promoted this comment It's twue! It's twue! was starred It's twue! It's twue! was unstarred
    Image of senatormayer senatormayer
    09:53 AM

    @It's twue! It's twue!: Should I feel bad for promoting a comment in reply to one of my own mad ravings? #scientology
     Reply
    senatormayer was starred senatormayer was unstarred
    Image of drunkexpatwriter drunkexpatwriter
    07:08 AM

    In reply to Scientology Seeks Investigative Journalists for a Potential Media Fight-Back
    So, if you are an experienced print journalist your career choices now are:

    1. Wait until you are laid off.

    2. Work for Scientology where they actually beat up their employees.

    That said, this sounds like the perfect job for Alessandra Stanley.

    Corrections? We don't do corrections! Xenu has guided you to write the truth! #scientology
     Reply
    drunkexpatwriter was starred drunkexpatwriter was unstarred
    Image of atlasfugged atlasfugged
    11/10/09

    In reply to How ABC News' Brian Ross Cooked His 'Hasan Contacted Al Qaeda' Scoop
    Good work, Mr. Cook. There are some in this thread and in other threads who are criticizing you for devoting so much effort to painting Nidal Hassan as something other than a terrorist. I, for one, haven't come to this conclusion. You certainly aren't engaging in that kind of supposed moralizing here. You are simply calling out a well-known journalist who regularly appears on a nationally-televised nightly news program for a misleading, poorly-sourced, and potentially inflammatory report. It's received widespread attention and has already been misappropriated by those who would like use this incident as evidence for a broader Islamist conspiracy. It's unlikely that Ross will retract the story or even deign to provide any clarification. If the mainstream media refuses to enforce the necessary journalistic accountability, then at least we have lowly bloggers like you to point out the inconsistencies. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    John Cook promoted this comment atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred
    Image of ms_priestypants ms_priestypants
    11/10/09

    In reply to Faux-Anthrax Terrorists Gunning For Vulnerable Media Agencies?
    And it is apparently late 2001 all over again. What is going on? #terror
     Reply
    ms_priestypants was starred ms_priestypants was unstarred
    Image of RandomLunatic RandomLunatic
    11/10/09

    In reply to How ABC News' Brian Ross Cooked His 'Hasan Contacted Al Qaeda' Scoop
    ABC News has been a muted Fox doppelganger for a while now. Ross is just proof of this. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    RandomLunatic was starred RandomLunatic was unstarred
    Image of HandsomeBwonderful HandsomeBwonderful
    11/10/09

    In reply to How ABC News' Brian Ross Cooked His 'Hasan Contacted Al Qaeda' Scoop
    Your nitwitted nit-pickery is awesome. The guy shot and killed over a dozen people. He did it in the name of Islam. He reached out to a radical cleric in Yemen. He's part of the storm on the horizon. Cry to Keith Olbermann, maybe you can get on MSNBC. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    John Cook promoted this comment HandsomeBwonderful was starred HandsomeBwonderful was unstarred
    Image of John Cook John Cook
    11/10/09

    @HandsomeBwonderful: Hey thanks for calling me awesome! "He reached out to a radical cleric in Yemen" is actually an accurate statement. Congratulations--you're a better reporter than Brian Ross. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    John Cook promoted this comment John Cook was starred John Cook was unstarred
    Image of HandsomeBwonderful HandsomeBwonderful
    11/10/09

    @John Cook: thanks for unstarring me. You weild the power! Awesome. ly petty. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    HandsomeBwonderful was starred HandsomeBwonderful was unstarred
    Image of John Cook John Cook
    11/10/09

    @HandsomeBwonderful: I figure starred commenters should actually be readers of the site, and if you read the site, you'd know that myself and many other Gawker writers have repeatedly criticized and mocked Keith Olbermann and that Gawker has been repeatedly attacked by him. #nidalmalikhasan
     Reply
    John Cook was starred John Cook was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Gawker account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.