David Carr is such a Times tool. The Gawker piece was really about how hypocritical FOX is, lynching gays on air, but not caring if their own people are gay. Carr just hates the fact that Gawker has more readers than the increasingly dull Times.
The people who go to Gawker for their news or even entertainment gossip are the same people who watch "The Kardashians" and those "Real Housewives" shows.
Gawker, like Bravo and other lowbrow, bottom feeding entities which spoon feed societal simpletons, is for and by people who don't like to read and who have little more than a junior high school education.
The Atlantic Wire is better.
R2, just no. Dlisted covers Bravo trash so you don't have to.
Gawker is primarily New York and DC-driven infotainment. If you depend upon it for hard-hitting news, you have a deficit. It's great for breaking news, but it aggregates that information and you go to the direct source.
The whine that they're covering old news or targeting Shep Smith is tiresome. Here's a hothead. He's banging a young guy. He placed the young guy at a higher position within the FOX ecosystem.
It's just as fascinating as the Bill O controversies, but it involves an established anchor and his piece of meat. It deserves equal coverage.
BTW, Nick is looking like shit.
R4 = DL's resident Gawker shill/troll.
Sorry troll, why not head over to FreeerRepublic, there's much more fertile ground there to dumb-down.
Nobody promotes R5's posts and she's bitter.
Try apartment therapy, R5. They'll publish any drivel.
R5, Gawker is actually more liberal than almost any other media site. You're not very bright, are you?
Great piece here on David Brooks getting "accurately insulted in his own paper" today. I'll take Gawker over war-cheerleading, fraudulent blowhards like David Brooks and Bill Keller any day.