#Conde nast gawker trial

Gawker is no longer the insolent blog that began in 2003. And Gawker has an influence and audience that demands greater editorial restraint. We are proud of running stories that others shy away from, often to preserve relationships or access. I can’t defend yesterday’s story as I can our coverage of Bill O’Reilly, Hillary Clinton or Hulk Hogan. I believe this public mood reflects a growing recognition that we all have secrets, and they are not all equally worthy of exposure. Some of our own writers, proud to work at one of the only independent media companies, are equally appalled. Not only is criticism of yesterday’s piece from readers intense, but much of what they’ve said has resonated. I cannot blame our editors and writers for pursuing that original mission.īut the media environment has changed, our readers have changed, and I have changed. “We put truths on the internet.” That has been the longstanding position of Gawker journalists, some of the most uncompromising and uncompromised on the internet. In the early days of the internet, that would have been enough. It concerns a senior business executive at one of the most powerful media companies on the planet. The story involves extortion, illegality and reckless behavior, sufficient justification at least in tabloid news terms. It was an editorial call, a close call around which there were more internal disagreements than usual. Yesterday evening, published a story about the CFO of Conde Nast texting an escort.

#Conde nast gawker trial

The trial was postponed after an appeals court intervened. This week, it was scheduled to square off against Hulk Hogan, who is suing for $100 million for allegedly invading his privacy by publishing an excerpt from a sex tape. The Geithner story comes at an inopportune moment for Gawker. “Besides Denton,” Trotter continued, “the partners who voted to remove the post were Andrew Gorenstein, who serves as the president of advertising and partnerships Heather Dietrick, who serves as President and chief legal counsel chief operating officer Scott Kidder chief strategy officer Erin Pettigrew and chief technology officer Tom Plunkett.” “Along the Craggs ,” Trotter wrote, “every other member of Gawker Media’s editorial leadership, including Gawker’s editor-in-chief Max Read and the executive editors of Gawker Media’s Politburo, strenuously protested removing the post.” Trotter released additional information about the decision to pull the story, saying the vote among Gawker’s managing partnership to retract the story was *4-2, with Geithner story editor Tommy Craggs and Heather Dietrick, president and chief legal counsel of Gawker Media, being the two dissenters. Jordan’s post was solidly in line with what Gawker has asked its writers and editors to do for years.

“I and a lot of my colleagues argued as strenuously against it as we could, and we lost,” he added. “Jordan’s post was solidly in line with what Gawker has asked its writers and editors to do for years,” Cook wrote in support of Sargent. Gawker executive editor John Cook disagreed with the retraction, calling it a “mistake.” I dont say this lightly: This is repugnant, shameful journalism Michael Barbaro ( July 17, 2015 Michael Barbaro of the New York Times called it “repugnant, shameful.” The story, written by Gawker’s Jordan Sargent, detailed a rendezvous allegedly planned between a male escort and Geithner and was widely criticized as excessively invasive journalism. Michael Wolff Reveals Gawker Boss Nick Denton's Private Thoughts on Oversight and Morals