4 ms·

Not sticking to sports is why they failed and needed new management and more invasive ads for revenue in the first place.

kevinh 7y ago
Do you have any evidence for that claim?
- manigandham 7y ago
  I’m in adtech and know enough publishers. I can’t share exact numbers but readership is way down. Constant political stories and culture outrage doesn’t make good sports reading. Contrast this with barstool sports which is doing well.
  - slg 7y ago
    >Constant political stories and culture outrage doesn’t make good sports reading. >Contrast this with barstool sports which is doing well. There is a high level of irony in these two comments considering Barstool doesn't "stick to sports" either. They just approach a lot of the same issues from the opposite direction as Deadspin.
    - pasquinelli 7y ago
      When people talk about politics they mean other people's politics. When they talk about their own politics it's just common sense.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Barstool has noticeably more coverage of actual sports and much less divisive political and cultural content. Low-brow/college humor is very different than left vs right politicking. It is not surprising that you will suffer audience loss when picking one side of the battle.
      - tclancy 7y ago
        They literally became famous for their daily “smokeshow” content. If that isn’t politically divisive I don’t know what is.
        big_chungus 7y ago
        A magazine targeting men distributing pictures of scantily-clad ladies? The humanity! On a more serious note, I don't hear any issue with tabloids putting guys in speedoes on the front, let alone hear it called, "politically divisive." What distinguishes the two?
        manigandham 7y ago
        Along with their sports coverage, yes. And how is “smokeshow” politically divisive?
  - darrmit 7y ago
    I’m not surprised to see this given what has happened to Gizmodo. It used to be one of the few tech sites I’d check daily but it has basically just become a constant stream of global warming and left-wing propaganda that even I, as left leaning, got sick of having rammed down my throat. Contrast that with another G/O Media site, Jalopnik, which continues to be one of my favorite sites on the Internet. The Verge also seems to have moved on mostly from trying to straddle “culture” and tech and is better for it.
  - selectodude 7y ago
    Yes, of course. Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2017 https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-full-transcript-of-donald-trumps-black-history-month-1791871370 https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-full-transcript-of-donal... Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2016 https://adequateman.deadspin.com/the-2016-hater-s-guide-to-the-williams-sonoma-catalog-1789529261 https://adequateman.deadspin.com/the-2016-hater-s-guide-to-t... Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2013 http://deadsp.in/cgmoid5 http://deadsp.in/cgmoid5 2012 https://deadspin.com/what-happens-when-a-35-year-old-man-retakes-the-sat-5893189 https://deadspin.com/what-happens-when-a-35-year-old-man-ret... I'm done diving into the archives but that's a pretty hot take you're throwing out there.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Of course they have extra content, but your links show that those articles have gotten more numerous and political over time.
  - sylens 7y ago
    found the stoolie
    - manigandham 7y ago
      I have 0 interest in sports or either of these 2 sites.
    - dang 7y ago
      Personal attacks will get you banned here. Please follow the rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - tclancy 7y ago
    Readership isn’t down because anyone who goes to Deadspin was offended by politics. That you would compare them to Barstool as an equivalent suggests one of us is badly confused. The company has been bought by a series of wet brained “investment” professionals who never bothered to discover what they bought. I have no idea why you would buy what was Gawker and then think neutering it would make it better.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Because Gawker did so well? Every media company is suffering massive losses and downsizing. There never was some great success here.
  - traderjane 7y ago
    Aren’t sports news tending toward data oriented reporting with online community?
and0 7y ago
They didn't fail. They were doing just fine, but the private equity firm that bought them up wanted them to completely change their editorial style.
samfbiddle 7y ago
This is completely wrong. Gawker Media was a profitable, growing company until Peter Thiel wrecked it and its subsidiary sites were sold to a series of increasingly incompetent owners. Deadspin's "non-sports" articles were regularly among its most widely read. In fact, here's a person whose job it was to sell ads for Deadspin explaining that you are incorrect: https://twitter.com/jillian_schulz/status/1189673861270429696 https://twitter.com/jillian_schulz/status/118967386127042969...
- manigandham 7y ago
  Gawker was a $200M company taking on a much smaller person until Thiel got involved. He used their own strategy of outspending the other side against them, and they decided to die on a hill of tabloid gossip rather than real news. Regardless if Deadspin did so well then it would continue doing so in the years since the lawsuit.
- at-fates-hands 7y ago
  > until Peter Thiel wrecked it. This is wrong. Gawker media were confident they could operate freely in legal grey areas and fall back on their “freedom of speech” defense when they published Hulk Hogan’s sex tape without his knowledge. The fact they decided to go to court and challenge Hogan over his claims of defamation was their own poor choice. The only thing Thiel did was bankroll Hogan’s legal team. A.J. Daulerio’s deposition and subsequent cavalier appearance and court testimony was probably the last nail in their coffin. In short, Gawker had been playing with fire before and escaped. The fact they thought this would be another easy escape proved to be their undoing. Nobody but Gawker and their editors who thought they could publish anything, about any celeb is what cost them their publication and their jobs - not just one guy who financially supported Hogan in his civil case.
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    Let's not forget why Thiel was upset at Gawker. They outed him as gay, putting his life in danger because he did business in places where the penalty for homosexuality is death.
thrower123 7y ago
Barstool took their niche as the edgy sports-adjacent content mill, and does it better. Not least because Portnoy is still willing to give the finger to the leagues and ESPN. Bill Simmons' grand Grantland experiment showed, for a brief shining moment, what the best possible version of this kind of thing was, but he lost his cover in Bristol, and the plug got pulled.

kevinh 7y ago

Do you have any evidence for that claim?

manigandham 7y ago
I’m in adtech and know enough publishers. I can’t share exact numbers but readership is way down. Constant political stories and culture outrage doesn’t make good sports reading. Contrast this with barstool sports which is doing well.
- slg 7y ago
  >Constant political stories and culture outrage doesn’t make good sports reading. >Contrast this with barstool sports which is doing well. There is a high level of irony in these two comments considering Barstool doesn't "stick to sports" either. They just approach a lot of the same issues from the opposite direction as Deadspin.
  - pasquinelli 7y ago
    When people talk about politics they mean other people's politics. When they talk about their own politics it's just common sense.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Barstool has noticeably more coverage of actual sports and much less divisive political and cultural content. Low-brow/college humor is very different than left vs right politicking. It is not surprising that you will suffer audience loss when picking one side of the battle.
    - tclancy 7y ago
      They literally became famous for their daily “smokeshow” content. If that isn’t politically divisive I don’t know what is.
      - big_chungus 7y ago
        A magazine targeting men distributing pictures of scantily-clad ladies? The humanity! On a more serious note, I don't hear any issue with tabloids putting guys in speedoes on the front, let alone hear it called, "politically divisive." What distinguishes the two?
      - manigandham 7y ago
        Along with their sports coverage, yes. And how is “smokeshow” politically divisive?
- darrmit 7y ago
  I’m not surprised to see this given what has happened to Gizmodo. It used to be one of the few tech sites I’d check daily but it has basically just become a constant stream of global warming and left-wing propaganda that even I, as left leaning, got sick of having rammed down my throat. Contrast that with another G/O Media site, Jalopnik, which continues to be one of my favorite sites on the Internet. The Verge also seems to have moved on mostly from trying to straddle “culture” and tech and is better for it.
- selectodude 7y ago
  Yes, of course. Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2017 https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-full-transcript-of-donald-trumps-black-history-month-1791871370 https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-full-transcript-of-donal... Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2016 https://adequateman.deadspin.com/the-2016-hater-s-guide-to-the-williams-sonoma-catalog-1789529261 https://adequateman.deadspin.com/the-2016-hater-s-guide-to-t... Here's Deadspin sticking to sports in 2013 http://deadsp.in/cgmoid5 http://deadsp.in/cgmoid5 2012 https://deadspin.com/what-happens-when-a-35-year-old-man-retakes-the-sat-5893189 https://deadspin.com/what-happens-when-a-35-year-old-man-ret... I'm done diving into the archives but that's a pretty hot take you're throwing out there.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Of course they have extra content, but your links show that those articles have gotten more numerous and political over time.
- sylens 7y ago
  found the stoolie
  - manigandham 7y ago
    I have 0 interest in sports or either of these 2 sites.
  - dang 7y ago
    Personal attacks will get you banned here. Please follow the rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- tclancy 7y ago
  Readership isn’t down because anyone who goes to Deadspin was offended by politics. That you would compare them to Barstool as an equivalent suggests one of us is badly confused. The company has been bought by a series of wet brained “investment” professionals who never bothered to discover what they bought. I have no idea why you would buy what was Gawker and then think neutering it would make it better.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Because Gawker did so well? Every media company is suffering massive losses and downsizing. There never was some great success here.
- traderjane 7y ago
  Aren’t sports news tending toward data oriented reporting with online community?

and0 7y ago

They didn't fail. They were doing just fine, but the private equity firm that bought them up wanted them to completely change their editorial style.

samfbiddle 7y ago

This is completely wrong. Gawker Media was a profitable, growing company until Peter Thiel wrecked it and its subsidiary sites were sold to a series of increasingly incompetent owners. Deadspin's "non-sports" articles were regularly among its most widely read. In fact, here's a person whose job it was to sell ads for Deadspin explaining that you are incorrect: https://twitter.com/jillian_schulz/status/1189673861270429696 https://twitter.com/jillian_schulz/status/118967386127042969...

manigandham 7y ago
Gawker was a $200M company taking on a much smaller person until Thiel got involved. He used their own strategy of outspending the other side against them, and they decided to die on a hill of tabloid gossip rather than real news. Regardless if Deadspin did so well then it would continue doing so in the years since the lawsuit.
at-fates-hands 7y ago
> until Peter Thiel wrecked it. This is wrong. Gawker media were confident they could operate freely in legal grey areas and fall back on their “freedom of speech” defense when they published Hulk Hogan’s sex tape without his knowledge. The fact they decided to go to court and challenge Hogan over his claims of defamation was their own poor choice. The only thing Thiel did was bankroll Hogan’s legal team. A.J. Daulerio’s deposition and subsequent cavalier appearance and court testimony was probably the last nail in their coffin. In short, Gawker had been playing with fire before and escaped. The fact they thought this would be another easy escape proved to be their undoing. Nobody but Gawker and their editors who thought they could publish anything, about any celeb is what cost them their publication and their jobs - not just one guy who financially supported Hogan in his civil case.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  Let's not forget why Thiel was upset at Gawker. They outed him as gay, putting his life in danger because he did business in places where the penalty for homosexuality is death.

thrower123 7y ago

Barstool took their niche as the edgy sports-adjacent content mill, and does it better. Not least because Portnoy is still willing to give the finger to the leagues and ESPN. Bill Simmons' grand Grantland experiment showed, for a brief shining moment, what the best possible version of this kind of thing was, but he lost his cover in Bristol, and the plug got pulled.