<![CDATA[Gawker: underminers]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: underminers]]> http://gawker.com/tag/underminers http://gawker.com/tag/underminers <![CDATA[ Pat O'Brien Fired For Passive-Aggressive Email ]]> 81376900-1Behold the power of an ill-conceived email message. For it wasn't horny, drunken voice mail or repeated bouts of excess drinking that got Pat O'Brien fired from celebrity news show the Insider. It was that pompous, undermining email where he called himself a "favorite son" of bitter poor Iowans who "want to vomit" over segments by his replacement in the anchor chair, Lara Spencer. "I'm actually not the one afraid for my job," he wrote, ominously.

Bosses were "infuriated," the Post reports this morning, and O'Brien is now out.

Speculation will inevitably turn to whether O'Brien was drunk when he wrote the email, but a coworker already told the Post it sprang from his "insecurity and jealousy." Which are the sort of emotional problems that tend to come vividly to the fore when one is no longer blunting them with drugs or alcohol.

[Post]

]]>
Gawker-5052130 Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:25:06 EDT Ryan Tate http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5052130&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Pat O'Brien: Only I Can Save Iowans From Vomiting ]]> It turns out that frequently rehabbed former Insider host and overall smarmy dude Pat O'Brien is an underminer. And one remarkably lacking in self-awareness, at that! We really expect more from men with mustaches. See, Pat just got back from Iowa—he's "a little bit of a favorite son there"—and met the real people. To help them (somehow?), he decided to email this undermine-spirational message to everyone at The Insider and Entertainment Tonight:

"Hi, folks, I just spent a couple of days in Iowa - I'm a little bit of a favorite son there - and I spoke with maybe a thousand people and was very hands-on. Even Joe Biden said, 'You should be running (for president)!' But what I came away with was, these people can't afford gas, books, food or schools or movies!

"I was approached a hundred times by people asking, 'Can you help us?' I tried to tell them we care, but they didn't buy it. They wanted to, but watching Anya and Lara [Spencer] pick out accessories makes the viewers want to vomit. I'll get killed for this, but I'm actually the one not afraid for my job. I want people to be happy."

"Lara" is apparently Pat's successor on the show. Alrighty.

[P6]

]]>
Gawker-5050501 Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:21:33 EDT Hamilton Nolan http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5050501&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Is George Clooney The Nemesis Of The Tabloid Economy? ]]> clooney.jpegGeorge Clooney has jokes. His latest celebrity-based antics: a swarm of paparazzi descended upon his house in Italy after a (false) rumor spread that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were going to be getting married there. Clooney, who was away working, heard about this, and ordered 15 large wedding tables to be set up on the house's lawn. The paps went crazy [Hollyscoop]! Clooney laughed. He's a funny guy. But there's more to this than just a friendly joke. Because George Clooney, one of the biggest celebrities in the world, doesn't just want to make himself chuckle; he wants to undermine the entire celebrity economy that gives him his lofty position in the first place.

First, it must be acknowledged that Clooney is a smart man. He's not a grown-up version of Ashton Kutcher, an airheaded frat boy pulling practical jokes that a team of writers dreamed up. Clooney may be a frat boy type and a practical joker, but he knows exactly what he's doing. He has a very solid reason for every career-related move that he makes; look at the crafty, political way he chooses his movies. Except that new one about the old-timey football thing—who knows what that's all about.

The point is, Clooney sees the big picture. Recall his response to the original unveiling of the "Gawker Stalker" map. While lots of celebrities moaned about the intrusion into their privacy and imagined ridiculous implications for their personal safety, Clooney actually had a plan: he told a bunch of entertainment publicists to flood the site with false tips, thereby rendering it useless. It turned out that the Stalker maps are hardly a threat to anyone, and the flood of outrageous fake tips that Clooney inspired eventually disappeared. But he did prove that he was thinking about how to fight back against the celebrity-industrial complex, and even came up with an effective strategy—more than you can say for Brad Pitt, whose decision to fire his publicist will (prediction!) fail to magically allow him to disappear from the eyes of the media.

The problem is that Clooney is a CORNERSTONE of that very same complex. A man who ambitiously rose from a bit part of "The Facts Of Life" to a place in the pantheon of outrageously famous movie stars is hardly a credible spokesman for the cause of anti-publicity. On top of that, the press that Clooney gets is, by celebrity standards, pretty positive. It's impossible to argue that the very same paparazzi and tabloid media that he deplores have not, on balance, been a boon to his career.

And look at it from the poor, poor entertainment reporter's perspective: without some effort at critical coverage, they are bound to feel like nothing more than tools of the equally powerful movie marketing machine. Sure, staking out every nightclub, restaurant, and dwelling place of a celebrity is not really hard-hitting, or even socially redeeming, reporting. But Clooney, whose father was himself a newsman, should understand that it's all part of the package of being a star—a deal that he surely enjoys.

The actor would doubtless say that he supports real journalism, which is all well and good. So do we! But Americans have an unfortunate taste for the minutiae of the lives of their big screen heroes. So perhaps some sort of bargain can be struck. The tabloids can promise to take Clooney's earnest projects seriously, and in return, he can throw them a bone by accepting that his social life will always appear in the gossip pages and on the blogs, until he chooses to retire into obscurity. Besides, even if he were to enlist each and every one of his celebrity friends in his cause of punking the media, it would never work—that story in and of itself would be covered to death, resulting in a level of scrutiny that's equal to the one that the Hollywood types already receive.

So let's all just get along, in the words of famous celebrity Rodney King. Except, of course, for those pranks on the paparazzi. Go right ahead with that. Nobody can stand those guys, anyhow.

]]>
Gawker-375668 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 12:47:37 EDT Hamilton Nolan http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=375668&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ JONATHAN SAFRAN FOER, UNDERMINER ]]> In response to Vanity Fair's earlier item about the play by an old friend of novelist Jonathan Safran Foer, about how novelist Jonathan Safran Foer suddenly got very rich and famous while his old friend did not, Foer says, "his play is hilarious and great. I hope it's bigger than The Lion King." [VF, Earlier]

]]>
Gawker-372040 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:13:26 EDT Pareene http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=372040&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Adweek Has Issues ]]> adweek.jpegYesterday Adweek, the Nielsen-owned trade magazine that competes with Ad Age, relaunched both its print edition and its website. Its ad campaign (natch) scored respectful coverage from New York Times ad beat guy Stuart Elliott, who goes on and on about its funny ads, and quotes executives explaining how changing technologies, attitudes, the interweb, blah blah blah make it just vital to relaunch the "weekly" at this time&mdash with only 36 issues per year. Not mentioned, though, either in Elliott's article or in the cheeky ads, are Adweek's staffing problems; at least nine editorial staffers have left in the past two years, and less than half have been replaced. Some of that exodus was made up of people who decided they simply couldn't continue to work with Adweek editor Alison Fahey. Why? Well, she's not one for being overly complimentary. Take, for example, the way she chose to motivate all her reporters last fall as they were scrambling to finish a long-forgotten assignment on time; One got the carrot, the rest got the stick. Full email after the jump.

[Redacted], thank you for completing this task, you win two extra days off.

The rest of you have until Monday at 10 am SHARP. For each agency profile

missing, the designated writer will be given another chance to make

deadline by receiving three new agency profile assignments that will be due

on Friday.

[Redacted], please go into the TOP50 file at 10 am and compile a list of what

is in there. I have the list of unassigned agency profiles that we will be

doling out Monday at 11.

Thank you,

Alison

]]>
Gawker-352963 Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:24:55 EST Hamilton Nolan http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=352963&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Late-Night Scabs Fold! ]]> rollingstone.jpg Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, both members of the striking Writers Guild, will go back on the air January 7. In a statement yesterday, Comedy Central said they were still hoping for a "swift resolution to the current stalemate that will enable the shows to be complete again." The implication is that Stewart and Colbert are reluctant to go back to work—so why the hell are they? Other late-night hosts like David Letterman, Jimmy Kimmel and Carson Daly (okay, in his case, "late-night host"), are also heading back to the airwaves. [NYTimes]

]]>
Gawker-336660 Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:00:28 EST Maggie http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=336660&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ The Gawker Book Party ]]>
We've wired publisher Nick Denton's house with livecams for the book party, which begins at 6:30 p.m. This way even if you're not invited, you can watch the awkward moments unfold between people who have fired each other at various publications. NEAT. Update, 1:03 a.m.: Annnnnd that's over now. Yeesh!

]]>
Gawker-307214 Thu, 04 Oct 2007 18:20:09 EDT Joshua Stein http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=307214&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Is Derek Blasberg The Fifth Column Of The Gaydom? ]]>
This video of freelance journalist Derek Blasberg and V magazine editor Chris Bollen cavorting in Venice has probably set the struggle for gay rights back to somewhere before 1950 and the founding of the Mattachine Society. Also that laugh! So Amadeus!

]]>
Gawker-303509 Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:15:56 EDT Joshua Stein http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=303509&view=rss&microfeed=true