thingsyouseeontheinternet

posts about #thingsyouseeontheinternet more →
Come On

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 ×

momo
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
Is henchhack a word? Can it be?
Reply

momo was starred momo was unstarred

RachelSklar
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
Oh, for fuck's sake, indeed. Remember when you interviewed me for PR Week, Hamilton? You know, when you worked there? Back then, I told you that I liked PR people, that I found the good ones extremely useful and helpful. You certainly seemed fine with PR people then: http://www.brandrepublic.com/InDepth/Features/577004/Interview-Rachel-Sklar/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH
Reply

RachelSklar was starred RachelSklar was unstarred

Hamilton Nolan
07/10/09

@RachelSklar: Yes, of course I remember. I like some PR people too. That's not really what this is about, though.
Reply

Hamilton Nolan was starred Hamilton Nolan was unstarred

RachelSklar
07/10/09

@Hamilton Nolan: Actually, yes, it is: That's the gist of the post, which I liked. When I like something, I tweet it out. I liked this. (I also liked the Entourage piece, but I'm biased because I wrote it. Just like I have always liked the Gawker "Our Advertisers" posts which are done by Gawker people in the Gawker voice.) If Gossip Girl sponsors Gawker, will you guys not do your roundup that week? If Diet Coke sponsors Mediaite, am I supposed to stop mentioning that I've had twelve that day? Never mind that this is from my personal Twitter. As always, I am confused about what all the hubbub is about.

So anyway: My point of bringing up that interview you did with me three years ago is to demonstrate how my views are pretty much exactly the same. It's pretty fucking simple: I liked the post.
Reply

RachelSklar was starred RachelSklar was unstarred

johnnypotatoes
07/10/09

@RachelSklar: "As always, I am confused about what all the hubbub is about."

Read that about 1,000 times. If it somehow sinks in after that, perhaps some progress will have been made.

I'm not sure why anyone would see something "By SPONSORED CONTENT" and keep reading, but that's just me.
Reply

johnnypotatoes was starred johnnypotatoes was unstarred

Anthony De Rosa
07/10/09

@Hamilton Nolan: Gawker runs ads for Nurse Jackie and then does reviews for it. There are numerous instances where Gawker editorial and Gawker ad department have crossed paths. Do I even need to mention Bloodcopy?

Gawker posts advertisements meant to look like editorial posts right in with the editorial.

Can you guys please stop acting like you're any different?
Reply

Anthony De Rosa was starred Anthony De Rosa was unstarred

raincoaster
07/11/09

@RachelSklar: Come on. A "sponsored post" is one that's paid for. If you weren't paid to put out, say so. If you were on retainer to put out (ie you were married to the product) say so. Is easy. Otherwise when I see this I'm going to hit you up with my:

Get 250,000 new Twitter Followers, guaranteed http://twurl.nl/6mracg PLZ RT

And you will have earned it.
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

raincoaster
07/11/09

@Soup: oh, but I LOVE THAT! When Gawker does this, someone (anyone? everyone?) should jump on it in just this way.
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

gawkimo
07/11/09

@raincoaster: The whole exchange above sounds like I'm listening in on an argument while in line for my egg-white-sandwich-and-coffee breakfast in midtown. I'm going to listen in, then Twat it on my Twit.
Reply

Edited by gawkimo at 07/11/09 3:33 AM gawkimo was starred gawkimo was unstarred

raincoaster
07/11/09

@gawkimo: As long as you wear the pleated pants and use your pockets creatively, no harm, no foul
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

abettertomorrow
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
well, based on the sponsored post, which I did read (thanks Gawker!) it's hard to tell which loathes the other more, publicists or reporters...

Which is it, media experts?

-------Are reporters just thin veneers of respectability, in place to provide another channel for organizations to get their message out, via money spent on publicists rather than money spent on ad buys?

-------Or are reporters principled defenders of the Truth, using and abusing publicists as they see fit, all in the pursuit of an honestly reported story, a balanced, comprehensive report on the issues of the day?
Reply

Edited by abettertomorrow at 07/10/09 3:50 PM abettertomorrow was starred abettertomorrow was unstarred

Anthony De Rosa
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
Let he who is without Bloodcopy on their hands throw the first stone.
Reply

Anthony De Rosa was starred Anthony De Rosa was unstarred

jasonelias
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
Yeah and Peter Bergman just happened to like Vicks Formula 44.
Reply

jasonelias was starred jasonelias was unstarred

Aaron Altman
07/10/09

In reply to Come On
Is this like the tweeted equivalent of only halfway throwing up?
Reply

Aaron Altman was starred Aaron Altman was unstarred

Lymed
07/10/09

@Aaron Altman: More like the tweeted equivalent of throwing up in one's mouth
Reply

Lymed was starred Lymed was unstarred

Aaron Altman
07/10/09

@Lymed: These comments in re: quasi-reverse peristalsis are brought to you by Breath Savers.
Reply

Aaron Altman was starred Aaron Altman was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#thingsyouseeontheinternet

Gawker

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker

Come On

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment