Gawker 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 8:12 AM
Fri Dec 4
53 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip Your Editors:
Tipline: 646-214-8138
Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder |
West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield |
Contributing Editors:
Valleywag:
Ryan Tate |
Media:
Hamilton Nolan |
Politics:
Alex Pareene |
Investigations:
John Cook |
Entertainment:
Brian Moylan |
Nights:
Adrian Chen |
Azaria Jagger |
Ravi Somaiya |
Weekends:
Foster Kamer |
Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
05/19/09
05/19/09
05/19/09
*comment would have been 31.7 percent more amusing had I bothered to figure out how to make the accents appear over the "e"s
05/19/09
05/19/09
I think the downfall of newspapers has coincided with grouping them with entertainment vs just being the news. They lost their niche when they started competing with other forms of entertainment.
05/19/09
05/19/09
05/19/09
05/19/09
The Washington Times is, in every aspect, a joke. It's a propaganda sheet owned and operated by a cult leader who is also a convicted tax fraud. Its international and domestic reporting resources pale are scant. It exists only to push a particular political point of view, which exists, per its mass marrying owner, on the far, far right of the political spectrum.
That you would compare the two--and set up an equal sign between them--only serves to call into question your own critical thinking facilities. Watching Fox News will do that to you.
05/19/09
05/19/09
05/19/09
05/19/09
Wow, you really managed to pull this discussion a long way from where it started. I started out talking about how I think the Washington Times is a joke because it is owned and operated by a cult leader who maintains that he is the Korean reincarnation of Jesus Christ.
As such, I believe the amount of cognitive dissonance required of anyone who considers himself or herself a serious journalist would be too great for them to keep the journalist side of their mind operational.
There's no comparison between that situation and any other media I can think of. There is no equal sign between the WT and other media, because to my knowledge, neither the NYT nor any other media with either a left or right slant is owned by someone proclaims to be the modern day reincarnation of Jesus Christ.
As for the Fox News comment, sorry, but I have noticed that otherwise intelligent people shut down their critical thinking abilities after watching a lot of that network. It's just an observation. I have no idea whether you are more intelligent than me; it wouldn't be that great a feat if you were. But I have noticed that you tend to peddle the same fact-free cant that permeates that network 24/7.
05/19/09
What I am attempting to point out that there is hardly a difference between WT, NYT, Daily Show and Gawker. This makes getting "news" difficult. One must read/watch a variety of media outlets in order to come up with some semblance of what is going on in this nutty world of ours. How very sad.
I will grant you that Pinch keeps his craziness more on the down-low than Asian Jesus. For that, I am grateful and he gets one point.
05/19/09
And what I am attempting to point out is that this is bullshit.
NYT is a series of editorials, not news; and is run by a man named Pinch for God's sake.
The most superficial perusal of the New York Times on any given day proves that this is demonstrably false, although I'm sure it makes a boffo talking point on The Factor.
Stories about events may indeed reveal an editorial bias, especially those about domestic politics (John McCain's lobbyist fellating, for instance); however, the majority of the news reporting in the paper manages to avoid that bias simply because of the breadth of news reported. Which is why it's still the paper to read if you want to know about a cyclone in Myanmar or a bus plunging in Ecuador.
And you do know that "Pinch" Sulzberger's nickname came from Spy Magazine, yes? His dad, much more respected, was named Punch. To say he's a bad publisher seems to be a bit of an understatement (although I confess to be bored shitless by the NY Times inside baseball that get played on Gawker, probably because it's one of the few major media companies (including News Corp., by the way) that I haven't worked at.
And the Washington Times editorial? Well--and this is really my point--who in their right fucking mind would read a newspaper owned and operated by a cult leader who claims to be Korean Baby Jesus? Unless, of course, they were ravenously desperate to have their political point of view validated by any outlet with the word Times on its masthead.
So...we are at what we middle-brow pseudo-intellectuals call an impasse. I maintain that there is no equal sign between the Washington Times and the New York Times. You maintain that there simply must be for anyone to be able to criticize Mr. Moon's paper. If that puts me on a "high horse" then so be it. Although I must say it feels less like a high horse than a Shetland pony.
05/19/09
05/15/09
Being naive and sophomoric is not the way to go through life.
05/15/09
05/15/09
05/15/09
05/15/09
05/15/09
I just don't agree with this one.
05/15/09
05/15/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
To use their image in a story about murdered children is a "little" over the line.
05/14/09
05/14/09
Also I use parentheses just to piss off some people around here who don't like these punctuation devices. So to them, I'd like to add- make sure you picture me doing air-quotes at the same time (with eyebrows lifted, natch).
05/14/09
05/14/09