![]() Disagreements about editorial judgment are matters to be resolved by editorial employees. ![]() Our opinions on the post are not unanimous but we are united in objecting to editorial decisions being made by a majority of non-editorial managers. Today’s unprecedented breach of the firewall, in which business executives deleted an editorial post over the objections of the entire executive editorial staff, demonstrated exactly why we seek greater protection. Our union drive has expressed at every stage of the process that one of our core goals is to protect the editorial independence of Gawker Media sites from the influence of business-side concerns. I find it a lot chilly when biz side folks get to vote on unpublishing stories, there's lots they'd like to kill - choire July 17, 2015Īround 5 p.m., Gawker writer Tom Scocca published a post with the tag “Editorial Standards” titled, “Hi, I Am a Cute and Very Harmless Kittycat.” It featured a photo of a wide-eyed kitten and one sentence: “Please don’t take me down.” An hour later, the Gawker Media editorial staff published a statement echoing the tweets above - the separation of business and editorial decisions is sacred - and arguing that the decision to take the post down against its wishes was further proof that the editorial side needed to unionize. What the fuck is happening?- Ernie July 17, 2015 Our editorial staff was vetoed by The Managing Partners. Jordan’s post was solidly in line with what Gawker has asked its writers and editors to do for years.- John Cook July 17, 2015 I and a lot of my colleagues argued as strenuously against it as we could, and we lost.- John Cook July 17, 2015 Many seem gobsmacked that the business side of the company had managed to overrule an editorial decision guided by years of mischief-making precedent. He ends by noting that some may see this move as a sign that Gawker is giving in.Įmployees - current and former - took to Twitter to debate the deletion and the original post. They have to be true and interesting.” In other words, they will have to be … news. They have to reveal something meaningful. It is not enough for them simply to be true. “But the media environment has changed, our readers have changed, and I have changed.” He adds that “this decision will establish a clear standard for future stories. “I cannot blame our editors and writers for pursuing that original mission,” he writes. In a long statement, Gawker CEO Nick Denton explained the decision. Everyone who worked on the editorial side of the company defended the post and its right to stay online, and everyone on the business and ad side of the company argued it should disappear. And it was a decision that many in the company appear to be very conflicted about. It was the first time the media company had removed a big story from the internet for editorial concerns rather than factual or legal ones. On Friday afternoon, after many hours of angry tweets and takes, Gawker decided to take down the story it had published the night before on a married Condé Nast executive who was being blackmailed by a gay escort.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |