Gawker wrecked a guys life for being an executive at a publishing company–according to Gwaker. Would the story have been interesting if he wasn’t married to a women, the almost-affair was with a gay porn star AND his brother was a former high-level official in the Obama administration? No. It would have been some average guy having a boring affair—that no one cares about. We don’t actually know it was an affair either, this could have been perfectly permissible within the confines of their marriage. It may not be your cup of tea, but your not living their lives. I have to say I was completely riveted by the salacious story for all the reasons listed above. And I wanted more pictures, videos, play by play accounts… But that’s human nature or its at least my nature. But I still wish it wasn’t posted.
Is it ok to expose someones sexual exploits of public figures—absolutely yes!!!
Political blowhards like Larry Craig, anti-gay activist like George Rekers and and religious hypocrites like Ted Haggard are all fair game. And I would even say the out going editor-in-chief of Gawker Max Read and Gawker CEO Nick Denton are now fair game for having their sexual exploits splashed over the internet. If you dish it you have to take it.
Max Read proudly tweeted:
Are you really concerted about David Geithner’s wife? Is humiliating her the best way to express that.. Maybe send her an unmarked manila envelope with the dirt next time.
Gawker’s true intentions were more clear in Max Read initial tweet about the story.
His name is David Geithner, not Tim. Clearly his story was only interesting because of his brother’s ties to the Obama administration.
After almost unanimous outrage from the internet Nick Denton pulls the story, but tries to justify his gay shaming of Geithner based on his position at Conde Nast calling it “one of the most powerful media companies on the planet.”
So both Max and Nick opened the door for us to shame them on their sex lives—so lets get on that ASAP.
I think if there is a silver lining in this story is we are seeing a maturing of the internet. A medium in which people can anonymously bully each other saw something from the collective masses. We mobilized against the bully, in this case Gawker, and won. The story was taken down, but unfortunately the damage was inflicted. I don’t me to say ‘we’ I was, of course, making snarky jokes and searching the web for naked pics of the escort, but the rest of you were doing good and thats what counts.
Does Gawker deserve a second chance? Yes. It does serve a useful purpose in the media by piercing some of the over inflated egos of celebrities, politicians, reality stars and public figures. And it acts as a social commentary on peculiarities in pop culture. If you get rid of Gawker what do you have left: TMZ, Entertainment Tonight, US Weekly, People Magazine, Buzz Feed. Is that really how you want pop culture commentary. I would bet most of TMZ’s scoops are called in from the actual celebrity themselves. We need a counter-culture force out there not beholden to the celebrity.
I know what you are saying “they ruined a man’s life.” Let’s say hypothetically his wife didn’t know. Now she does. Gawker needs to pay up and I’m sure they will be sued for plenty. David Geithner has to man-up—give his wife a divorce and half the money with no long legal drawn out bitter divorce. They’re both still young, good-looking, rich and can go live the lives they are supposed to. Conde Nast is not going to fire Geithner or force him to step down, he is seen as a sympathetic figure by the public. Conde Nast is very savvy, they saw how fast the public turned on Gawker and surely they don’t want the public to turn on them. I’m sure its not the fairytale life the Geithner hope for but its a reality now.
As for Gawker lets give them one more chance, just one more to get it right. I’m just not ready to quit Gawker yet. Don’t disappoint us again!