4 ms·
Would you prefer the New York Times?[1] Or maybe The Washington Post?[2] And let's not pretend that anyone has any evidence of actual problems at Gawker, only d
by ijk 12y ago
Would you prefer the New York Times?[1] Or maybe The Washington Post?[2] And let's not pretend that anyone has any evidence of actual problems at Gawker, only disproven accusations.
[1] http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/intel-pulls-ads-from-site-after-gamergate-boycott/ http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/intel-pulls-ads-fro...
[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/14/the-only-guide-to-gamergate-you-will-ever-need-to-read/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/10/...
- sb057 12y agoConsidering that those sites both have much more objective coverage, yes. That being said, there is considerable evidence of corruption at Gawker. http://www.historyofgamergate.com/kotaku-in-action.html http://www.historyofgamergate.com/kotaku-in-action.html
- ijk 12y agoThere's no corruption on the part of Kotaku described at that link. None. It's also excellent evidence that this is all about harassing Zoe Quinn and has nothing to do with ethics or journalism.
- applewut 12y agoNo corruption at all, none, not for years: http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/343871/Corruption-consumer-hate-and-bad-journalism-in-games-journalism/ http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/343871/Corruption-co...
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]