Self-Explanatory
Oh, why the hell not.  Thingz in buttz, gotta luv it.

Oh, why the hell not.  Thingz in buttz, gotta luv it.

It. Is. Finished.
(via Gawker)

It. Is. Finished.

(via Gawker)

I’m expecting chaos, but as the front pages of our sites become ever more professional, it’s even more important to allow anarchy to bubble up from below. The goal is to blur the line between our editors and commenter-contributors. News and discussion have been so segregated on the web. You think of the 1990s era discussion forum software. Really hasn’t changed. Maybe we should think of journalists as the instigators and moderators of discussion. News follows from discussion as much as discussion follows from news. Successful sites — and useful publishing software platforms — will bring the two together so they can feed off each other.

Nick Denton, Got a #tip? Gawker opens tag pages to masses. (via soupsoup)

Indeed!

From: “Why We Need to Be Reminded That Michelle Obama is Descended from Slaves” by John Cook
Now, I can go either way with John Cook, but it’s fair to say it’s almost comical to imagine these two in any sort of discourse.
Compare the two: Informed, well-written/8th grade writing level at best. Thought-provoking, engaging/insultingly aimless. Good/Bad. Black/White.

From: “Why We Need to Be Reminded That Michelle Obama is Descended from Slaves” by John Cook

Now, I can go either way with John Cook, but it’s fair to say it’s almost comical to imagine these two in any sort of discourse.

Compare the two: Informed, well-written/8th grade writing level at best. Thought-provoking, engaging/insultingly aimless. Good/Bad. Black/White.

fek:

gawkerisbarrenwithoutcajunboy:
I’d feel more enlightened watching “Fat Girl Laughing” repeatedly on YouTube than perusing Belonsky…The Gawker readership (most important?) seems to agree.
The comments represent such a small, marginal portion of Gawker’s readership; I’m willing to venture that most of the people coming by the site (who’re unlike everyone I know going to the site) aren’t very interested in the writers as compared to one another. The Week quotes him often, so has The Atlantic and Newser. Whatever on all that. What these people don’t realize is why the comparison between Cajun Boy and a homeless guy is funny.

Great, so Belonsky gets quoted by other media outlets. Is that the only qualification required to write for Gawker? Having a discriminating voice, solid opinions, and a cogent fan base must be inconsequential. There are people who could write to elevate Gawker (perhaps an absurd ambition, but bear with me) and there are those who can use it as a personal masturbation rag.
Straight from the horse’s mouth:
“We used to refer to our comment environment as a club […] If we’re going to maintain credibility, we need a the equivalent of a VIP room. […] And — we hope — it will be this salon that sets the tone of discussion.
Our comments have stood out amid the illiterate abuse and empty-headed wittering of the rest of the internet; we’re going to make sure it stays that way as the audience continues to expand.” - Denton (italics added)
When the Gawker readership gentry (and both Snyder and Denton seem to agree that they matter [and it seems laughable and counterintuitive to imagine they don’t]) responds to a new writer with constant disappointment and vitriol, one would think it’s in Gawker’s best interest to rectify their blunder. This would result in not only maintaining current readership, but maybe even, hope of all hopes, gaining more followers! Granted, this is elevating the night beat to more epic proportions than reality permits, but nevertheless, for a blog network contingent on pageviews and an ever-expanding fan base, alienation seems like bad business.

fek:

gawkerisbarrenwithoutcajunboy:

I’d feel more enlightened watching “Fat Girl Laughing” repeatedly on YouTube than perusing Belonsky…The Gawker readership (most important?) seems to agree.

The comments represent such a small, marginal portion of Gawker’s readership; I’m willing to venture that most of the people coming by the site (who’re unlike everyone I know going to the site) aren’t very interested in the writers as compared to one another. The Week quotes him often, so has The Atlantic and Newser. Whatever on all that. What these people don’t realize is why the comparison between Cajun Boy and a homeless guy is funny.

Great, so Belonsky gets quoted by other media outlets. Is that the only qualification required to write for Gawker? Having a discriminating voice, solid opinions, and a cogent fan base must be inconsequential. There are people who could write to elevate Gawker (perhaps an absurd ambition, but bear with me) and there are those who can use it as a personal masturbation rag.

Straight from the horse’s mouth:

“We used to refer to our comment environment as a club […] If we’re going to maintain credibility, we need a the equivalent of a VIP room. […] And — we hope — it will be this salon that sets the tone of discussion.

Our comments have stood out amid the illiterate abuse and empty-headed wittering of the rest of the internet; we’re going to make sure it stays that way as the audience continues to expand.” - Denton (italics added)

When the Gawker readership gentry (and both Snyder and Denton seem to agree that they matter [and it seems laughable and counterintuitive to imagine they don’t]) responds to a new writer with constant disappointment and vitriol, one would think it’s in Gawker’s best interest to rectify their blunder. This would result in not only maintaining current readership, but maybe even, hope of all hopes, gaining more followers! Granted, this is elevating the night beat to more epic proportions than reality permits, but nevertheless, for a blog network contingent on pageviews and an ever-expanding fan base, alienation seems like bad business.

I’d feel more enlightened watching “Fat Girl Laughing” repeatedly on YouTube than perusing Belonsky’s night-drivel. The Gawker readership (most important?) seems to agree. I guess the only one who’s a true fan is Gabriel Snyder…

I’d feel more enlightened watching “Fat Girl Laughing” repeatedly on YouTube than perusing Belonsky’s night-drivel. The Gawker readership (most important?) seems to agree. I guess the only one who’s a true fan is Gabriel Snyder…

gawker:

skybarn:

“I’m torn about the Polanski arrest. I’ve long said he should be re-arrested but new evidence does back up his account of WHY he fled.”

danielabrams

Is he trying to give Gawker a stroke? Wait, dumb question.

(via skybarn)

Doesn’t Gawker like to go after Mediaite? Something like this will give them more of a boner than a stroke. Wait. Um, what I meant was, uh…

(via dailyhuff)

Not necessarily. We “go after” (if by which you mean: write about) the things that interest us. Quite frankly, I’m kind of with Dan on this one.

(via fek) You guys should just let Belonsky write a “joke” involving Polanski and William Safire. No one will ever have to write about either subject again.
OK, I got one. Roman Polanski, William Safire and Julia Allison are in a helicopter ride over the slums of rural Mississippi. Polanski say, I have an idea. Why don’t I throw a $100 bill out the window and make somebody happy. Safire says, I have a better idea. Why not throw 100 one-dollar bills out the window and make 100 people happy. Then Julia Allison pipes up and says, Why don’t both of you throw yourselves out the window and make EVERYBODY happy.

Riotous. Is this our hero? Typo says yes?

fek:

youngmanhattanite:

justsayjolie:
Tyler Coates™ will be greatly relieved by this initiative.
You beat us to it.

Uh, $40 an hour? I’m asking for a raise.

i.e. Fix Belonsky

fek:

youngmanhattanite:

justsayjolie:

Tyler Coates™ will be greatly relieved by this initiative.

You beat us to it.

Uh, $40 an hour? I’m asking for a raise.

i.e. Fix Belonsky

The world’s absolutely abuzz over news about the Emmy Awards, which are kind of like television’s Oscars and very important.

Andrew Belonsky, Entertainment Sage



What would be the purpose of sarcasm here? Or is he just high? This seems more Livejournal-worthy than Gawker-ready. I feel offended.

“Even the highest ivory towers, where our leaders and celebrities live and work, have been infiltrated by the nation’s insanity. No one is safe. America, we’re doomed.” - Andrew Belonsky
This sounds like the poorly worded ‘conclusion paragraph’ of a theme paper written by a seventh grader (lacking a strong central idea!) I feel a more compelling close could have been lifted from freetermpapers.com or some such fuckery. But we’ve learned an important lesson - Watch out, leaders and celebrities… The nation’s insanity is comin’ to getcha! Thanks for the heads up, Andy!
Oy. Why.

“Even the highest ivory towers, where our leaders and celebrities live and work, have been infiltrated by the nation’s insanity. No one is safe. America, we’re doomed.” - Andrew Belonsky

This sounds like the poorly worded ‘conclusion paragraph’ of a theme paper written by a seventh grader (lacking a strong central idea!) I feel a more compelling close could have been lifted from freetermpapers.com or some such fuckery. But we’ve learned an important lesson - Watch out, leaders and celebrities… The nation’s insanity is comin’ to getcha! Thanks for the heads up, Andy!

Oy. Why.