›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Gizmodo: "You don't get to call us unprofessional"

Comments

  • Nine BoomerNine Boomer
    I thought it was pretty obvious Gizmodo didn't do journalism.
  • FunfetusFunfetus
    What's a Gizmodo?
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    The best comment was someone posting this image (comment's probably been removed by now - they've been doing that quite a bit)
    image
  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
    I read this as it was linked from a blog I read. I quite like it, as a rant. There's a reason I like this forum, where the only time it gets negative is when people are annoyed that they can't buy shit from a web store.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    I read this as it was linked from a blog I read. I quite like it, as a rant. There's a reason I like this forum, where the only time it gets negative is when people are annoyed that they can't buy shit from a web store.
    Yep. Also, I'm perfectly on board with Joel Johnson. Guy got sexually assaulted as a kid and has the courage to write about it for BoingBoing, and the commenters who disagree with him on another blog bring it to his editor because they got butthurt in an argument with him about gadgets on Giz? Fuck them in the face. Joel Johnson wins this round.
  • AprecheApreche
    GeekNights has been calling Gizmodo unprofessional shmucks for a very long time. Engadget only k thx.
  • SailSail
    Isn't Gizmodo the one who went around with TV-B-Gones at CES and messed with all the displays?
  • AprecheApreche
    Isn't Gizmodo the one who went around with TV-B-Gones at CES and messed with all the displays?
    Among many many other unprofessional shenanigans, like paying the guy for the iPhone leak and such.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    GeekNights has been calling Gizmodo unprofessional shmucks for a very long time. Engadget only k thx.
    Same here. If I recall, I've been a Gizmodo hater since back in 2006 when they said "iPhone's coming out Monday, guys," and it turned out to be some Linksys bullshit nobody cared about. "Oh, but we didn't lie!" Fuck you, if you're gonna be a pretentious douche, I'll point my browser someplace else.

    They're essentially the Fox News of the technology world: sensationalist bullshit that we're supposed to accept as journalism. It's okay to have an opinion - especially in a review - but to behave the way they do is just ridiculous.

    Anyway:
    You Don't Get To Call Us Unprofessional
    First of all, you probably mean "biased." Second of all, journalism isn't a term that means "stories you agree with". Third of all, fuck you.
    ಠ_ಠ
    Yep. Also, I'm perfectly on board with Joel Johnson. Guy got sexually assaulted as a kid and has the courage to write about it for BoingBoing, and the commenters who disagree with him on another blog bring it to his editor because they got butthurt in an argument with him about gadgets on Giz? Fuck them in the face. Joel Johnson wins this round.
    I don't really see how any of this is relevant to how professional Gizmodo is...
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    I don't really see how any of this is relevant
    It looks like you came to the wrong forum.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    I don't really see how any of this is relevant to how professional Gizmodo is...
    How much of the post did you read, exactly?
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited November 2010
    HA. As we all know, the most professional way to respond to allegations of being unprofessional is to create a raving, defensive rant as an "article."
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    He never once called the rant an article in the body of text. It's more of an OpEd.

    I am in no way saying that Giz does journalism, or that they're professionals. I'm just saying that credit should be given where credit is due.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    He never once called the rant an article in the body of text. It's more of an OpEd.
    Whether editorial in nature or not, that is an article (a nonfictional literary composition that forms an independent part of a publication, as of a newspaper or magazine). Moreover, it is poorly written and juvenile.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    That's valid. The quality of writing has no bearing on whether something is or is not passable as an article, though. The National Enquirer has articles.
  • Kate MonsterKate Monster
    edited November 2010
    That's valid. The quality of writing has no bearing on whether something is or is not passable as an article, though. The National Enquirer has articles.
    Yes, and they, despite their quality of subject matter and writing, do not call out their detractors within their articles. When The National Enquirer out classes a publication, that publication might want to rethink their course of action.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    I do not consider Gizmodo a formal publication. Without journalistic integrity, it's just a blog. It's a LJ filled with tech news.

    That doesn't change the fact that using someone's horrific childhood trauma as a weapon against them in an otherwise trivial and unrelated argument is horrible and underhanded, though.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    I don't really see how any of this is relevant to how professional Gizmodo is...
    How much of the post did you read, exactly?
    The whole thing. Yes, even the part about him getting raped. That sucks and all, and any commenter getting personal about it is obviously a douche. That's so obvious it's not even worth talking about. So how does "Joel Johnson win this round"?
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    edited November 2010
    So how does "Joel Johnson win this round"?
    The round being "that point." Note the above: I don't think Giz is journalism. However, he has the right to publicly excoriate anyone acting like that. As for the rest of his rant, it was bullshit, although Hunter S. Thompson did once say that "objective journalism is bullshit," and I believe that to be a fact.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    So how does "Joel Johnson win this round"?
    The round being "that point." Note the above: I don't think Giz is journalism. However, he has the right to publicly excoriate anyone acting like that. As for the rest of his rant...That was bullshit. Although, Hunter S. Thompson did once say that "objective journalism is bullshit," and I believe that to be a fact.
    Alright, argument over. We're on the same page.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    edited November 2010
    Alright, argument over. We're on the same page.
    Cool, cool.

    In a way, I feel kind of bad. Brian Lam has all the essential qualities for a great gonzo journalist: He's charismatic, a bit unhinged, overly impulsive, and ultimately (in my opinion) a pretty likeable guy. The problem is that somewhere along the line he lost a grasp of what makes journalists different from average people with laptops putting words on the internet, and now he's just playing at being something he's not. What's worse is that there is an entire Gawker blog underneath him doing the same thing.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
Sign In or Register to comment.