I wish Anonymous would hack them again to punish them for the shittastic redesign.
Why GAWKER MEDIA?! WHYyyyyyyyy?!?!
|by Anonymous||reply 91||April 1, 2011 3:02 PM|
I know; WTF?
|by Anonymous||reply 1||February 9, 2011 6:02 AM|
It sucks and unfortunately all the associated sites like Gizmodo also have followed their lead.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||February 9, 2011 6:04 AM|
"Re-design! Re-design! Re-design!"
|by Anonymous||reply 3||February 9, 2011 6:07 AM|
it looks very cheap.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||February 9, 2011 6:11 AM|
i09.com actually went first.%0D %0D Sigh.%0D %0D So don't go, don't comment, and they'll notice the drop in traffic, and maybe they'll go back. Or fix the new system to not be quite so sucky.%0D
|by Anonymous||reply 5||February 9, 2011 6:14 AM|
They've been getting worse and worse for years. I read theawl.com now to get quality content from the better former editors/writers without the tmz-style crap gawker has now.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||February 9, 2011 6:18 AM|
there's a button/icon at the top, at the right of the left "article" segment that lets you change it back to "blog" view.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||February 9, 2011 6:22 AM|
By forcing you to click on individual posts, the stupid ads get more "impressions."
|by Anonymous||reply 8||February 9, 2011 6:36 AM|
Even the "blog" view sucks. For one thing, pressing the back button on you browser does not take you back to the main page (unless they've fixed that).
|by Anonymous||reply 9||February 9, 2011 7:05 AM|
Thanks r7.%0D %0D I hate the stupid Most Popular thing on the right that you can't scroll and the lack of the top stories in the masthead, but at least in the classic view I know how to look at posts older than the front page.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 10||February 9, 2011 7:07 AM|
Thanks for the thread, OP. I fucking hate the new design. It's horrible, not useful, and, I would guess, will be gone in a month or so. It seems as if everybody hates it; maybe it was created by the same genius who tried to screw with Coca-Cola.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||February 9, 2011 7:17 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 12||February 9, 2011 8:31 AM|
It's ugly. It's not elegant. Real eyesore. And it makes it look so commercial and colorful that it's at odds with its roots as snarky and cool.
But it's a relief for me because now it means I don't have to click on the various sites throughout the hour as I used to. As with the poster above, I'm going to check it once a day and that's it.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||February 9, 2011 1:32 PM|
I just checked it. You're right; it's unreadable.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||February 9, 2011 2:17 PM|
What fresh hell is this? I thought the page was loading, and it gave me 2 stories?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||February 9, 2011 3:58 PM|
It's cool with me because I finally have the motivation to stop visiting that shit-ass site. Thanks Denton!
|by Anonymous||reply 16||February 9, 2011 7:59 PM|
and if you try to scroll down with your arrow button - it's loads the next story. Fuck that shit.
It's impossible to view threads for a story. I tried to read the break-up threads and it's like an iq test.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||February 9, 2011 8:07 PM|
they've frozen my browser the two times I've tried to check it out.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||February 9, 2011 9:29 PM|
Fuck Lifehacker's redesign with a two dollar bill and a turnip!
|by Anonymous||reply 19||February 9, 2011 9:40 PM|
I tried to post a new comment (not a reply to an existing comment) and it wouldn't let me. I typed stuff in, and the submit button looked 'grayed out'... I clicked it and it seemed to click, but nothing happened. %0D %0D Eventually I just went to a new page, because it wouldn't post what I had typed no matter how many times I clicked submit.%0D %0D WTF?%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 20||February 10, 2011 12:58 AM|
Has it gotten any better? I don't want to check.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||February 12, 2011 2:04 AM|
Nope. No change.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 22||February 12, 2011 2:06 AM|
I used to like the Gawker Stalker postings but no way to find that on the redesign!
|by Anonymous||reply 23||February 12, 2011 2:10 AM|
The amount of comments seems way down.%0D
|by Anonymous||reply 24||February 12, 2011 2:12 AM|
Fuck. They fucked up deadspin too. I didn't realize that til now. GRRRRRRR.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||February 12, 2011 2:19 AM|
Gawker, io9, gizmodo, lifehacker, Deadspin, Kotaku, jalopnik, and jezebel. %0D %0D Fleshbot is thankfully avoiding the 'redesign'.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 26||February 12, 2011 2:28 AM|
The writing is also worst and dickish.
The facebook and Egypt stuff and that wasteful Steve Jobs thing.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||February 12, 2011 2:30 AM|
Hate it. I was wondering why do this? Why? It wasn't broken the way it was. And I agree too the soul of it has been missing too.
Where do people go on the web now? What are the hot new sites?
|by Anonymous||reply 28||February 12, 2011 2:33 AM|
Off topic but still enough time to roll a joint and get some munchies ready for Bill Maher.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||February 12, 2011 2:36 AM|
Hate it. Worse than Cheney.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||February 12, 2011 2:37 AM|
Did Gawker secretly sell off to someone else (a la HuffPo-AOL) and that's why the redesign happen?
|by Anonymous||reply 31||February 12, 2011 2:41 AM|
Thank you op! Gawker changed it so you are forced to click on the link to read the story, instead of scanning down a page and getting the quick recap.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||February 12, 2011 2:51 AM|
R28, it looks like the regular commenters are decamping to a site called crasstalk.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||February 12, 2011 3:03 AM|
there's a group on facebook called "the Gawker redesign sucks" or similar
|by Anonymous||reply 34||February 12, 2011 4:05 AM|
The redesign is ugly, slow and buggy. The comments are very hard to browse and the quality of the articles is just terrible. Shit like "How to Cheat Online%E2%80%94and Get Away with It" posted on Gizmodo? WTF?
How big of an ego does Denton have if he truly believes that the redesign is an improvement and the readers just don't get the brilliance of the new Gawker Media?
|by Anonymous||reply 35||February 12, 2011 8:02 AM|
I'm getting used to it. But it still looks dumb. Bigger and more colorful and dumber. It looks like what I imagine the Sunday Parade online looks like.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||February 12, 2011 11:52 AM|
the redesign is terrible. Used to spend quite a bit of time on their various sites going through several pages on both, now can barely make it through one page on one site, and have no desire to visit their others after that experience. being able to 'click off blog' layout is only a minimal fixer. the fuckery on the right side is awful and takes up too much space. the stationary fuckery bar on the bottom is beyond annoying. it's like trying to look through a shrunken peephole to try and see the actual stories. it's become not worth it to visit the site and it's sister sites. shame. pathetic.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||February 12, 2011 12:31 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 38||February 15, 2011 9:21 PM|
I barely can get articles to load. It's awful. Unreadable, slow and filled with bugs.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||February 15, 2011 9:28 PM|
Looks bloated and there are like two comments per entry. So unreadable.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||February 15, 2011 9:41 PM|
where the hell did valleywag go?
|by Anonymous||reply 41||February 15, 2011 9:52 PM|
OMG I just made an amazing discovery y'all:%0D %0D For some reason Canada's gawker version is untainted by the awful redesign.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||February 19, 2011 5:48 AM|
R42, you are a genius! That works for gizmodo as well!
|by Anonymous||reply 43||February 19, 2011 5:57 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 44||February 19, 2011 1:55 PM|
Check out how Gawker's page views have plummeted since the redesign. Not a good move Denton.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||February 20, 2011 9:53 PM|
Metblogs (a chain of locally written city blogs) was pretty popular until it redesigned around '08. When people (including the bloggers) complained, the owner took a lofty attitude, assuring the public they'd grow to love it and telling the bloggers to take a hike if they didn't like it.
People left; comments plummeted; more people left; rinse, repeat. The site cratered. They were planning to shut it down, but it's still up for the time being, though many of the individual city blogs haven't been updated for a year or more.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||February 20, 2011 10:49 PM|
They're killing their brand.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||February 21, 2011 1:38 AM|
How the fuck do you know if your comments get any responses? You used to get notified, now I can't see any notifications.%0D %0D What a fucking pain.%0D
|by Anonymous||reply 48||February 21, 2011 2:36 AM|
This interview deals with a lot of the rationale behind the redesign:
|by Anonymous||reply 49||February 21, 2011 3:33 AM|
The marketing rationale might seem to make sense, but it doesn't translate into a usable site for USERS.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 50||February 21, 2011 3:36 AM|
So it's all about more hits and page views to increase ad sales and get on the agencies' radar? Not exactly working out so well. It's obvious less people are going to the site and spending less time on it, which is going to reflect on their ComScore numbers and thereby fucking up their plans in getting onto the big media buying agencies schedules. Idiots.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||February 21, 2011 4:06 AM|
r49, that was an interesting read.
Here's the thing for me. I may go to gawker for the big story but I stay for the smaller (less popular stories, I guess) that aren't being covered by other sites.
For example the shirtless craigslist congressman. Gawker broke that story. They wrote the story and provided updates. The thing is - I may read or learn about the story @ gawker - but I may move on the Nytimes or a political blog for a different perspective of what it all means. If I really want to understand who this congressman is and what his resignation means - I'm not going to get that from gawker. I may learn something from a post but I'll learn more elsewhere.
Popular stories that were days or a week old would sit a the top of the page - like a friendly reminder. Now if you are following a conversation on a story that is a few days - it's difficult to find.
r48 points out another problem. You can't track your comments and we are no longer notified on replies. That seems like a great way to drive away traffic. Today I clicked on the .ca site and had 8 replies. I didn't reply back because I had moved on and others covered my point. It's no longer fun, interesting or interactive.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||February 21, 2011 4:22 AM|
It's also very difficult to navigate without a mouse without a scroll-wheel.%0D %0D I use my laptop most of the time, and it's just a pain to use.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 53||February 21, 2011 4:23 AM|
That's an enormous loss of traffic. I haven't been there, myself, since I gave up on them reversing the design maybe 3 days or so after it took place.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||February 21, 2011 8:24 AM|
I still stop by, but my stay is very brief. Someone said the new design makes you go cross eyed. It really does. Thought I'd miss it because I visited there so frequently, but I don't at all.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||February 21, 2011 2:50 PM|
There's a button at the top to switch to "blog view" (in the bar with the site name)... it sorta helps a little, but still...%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 56||February 21, 2011 2:54 PM|
R42 - Thank You! Now I can enjoy reading Gawker again. Great tip!
|by Anonymous||reply 57||February 21, 2011 3:16 PM|
I've noticed some minor improvements... a new scrollbar on the story list bar on the right. Also, the "blog view" is much improved too.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 58||February 21, 2011 8:12 PM|
The new layout does keep improving incrementally but the initial totally incomprehensible redesign just highlighted how the content isn't really worth putting any effort into finding. Richard Lawson needs to find a new gig
|by Anonymous||reply 59||February 21, 2011 8:19 PM|
Yeah, Lawson's recaps are the one thing I would make an effort for.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||February 21, 2011 8:52 PM|
Urgh this always happens. They always ruin good things.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||February 21, 2011 9:04 PM|
R42 The .uk site is ok as well - must just be a US redesign.I don't know which other domains to test it with.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||February 21, 2011 9:05 PM|
Their sites are going into the "check when I'm really bored" folder.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||February 21, 2011 9:10 PM|
The commenting has really fallen off.%0D
|by Anonymous||reply 64||February 22, 2011 5:38 AM|
Hoo Hoo Haw Haaaa Gawker/Gizmodo (Same site), that front group for the young scientology crowd (Yes, Denton the owner mostly hires scientologists)got screwed today when Google changed their algorithm to put Gawker, Gizmodo and all of Denton's crap sites into the lowest search levels. (Google people HATE Scientologists).. I love it!
|by Anonymous||reply 65||February 25, 2011 11:13 PM|
Gawker finally posts about their redesign:
|by Anonymous||reply 66||March 1, 2011 3:19 PM|
Must watch video!! Nick Denton is a greedy idiot!
|by Anonymous||reply 67||March 1, 2011 3:59 PM|
Gawker has stopped working for me. When I click on a story nothing happens. When I reload with the story URL, I just get a blank page.%0D %0D And there is nothing in the right hand list.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||March 1, 2011 4:06 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 69||March 1, 2011 7:33 PM|
Same here, r68. I'm DONE.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||March 1, 2011 8:51 PM|
denton is a scientologist?%0D %0D Why does gawker make fun of scientologists all the time then?
|by Anonymous||reply 71||March 1, 2011 8:58 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 72||March 2, 2011 1:27 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 73||March 2, 2011 1:28 AM|
I use firefox with noscript. DL loads just fine. Gawker is a blank white page.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||March 2, 2011 8:12 AM|
I just tried to read a story on Jezebel and it wouldn't even load its own page. They've destroyed their business.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||March 2, 2011 8:22 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 76||March 2, 2011 2:56 PM|
it sucks now. hardly go there anymore due to the redesign.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||March 2, 2011 2:58 PM|
R77, have you tried the suggestions here? Switching to Blog View? And noticing the changes and fixes they've made based on feedback?%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 78||March 2, 2011 3:02 PM|
All the sites are in the old mode if you use the Canadian address.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||March 2, 2011 3:12 PM|
I've just been going to crasstalk:
|by Anonymous||reply 80||March 3, 2011 12:29 PM|
It sucks. I hope they can recover from this, but the drop in the number of comments is very steep and the commenters who remain are not exactly the cream of the crop.%0D %0D I hate that merely hovering the cursor for half a second over another article takes me to that article (navigating Gawker's redesigned site with an arrow key is not recommended) and I hate that I can't tell who is replying to whom in the comments.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||March 3, 2011 12:39 PM|
is it gone for good?
|by Anonymous||reply 82||March 5, 2011 2:21 PM|
I have no idea what you're talking about with the 'hovering' concept.%0D %0D I find it sucks a lot less now.%0D %0D But yeah, the fact that you can't tell who is replying to whom in the comments still sucks.%0D %0D At least they got notifications of replies (sorta) working.%0D %0D
|by Anonymous||reply 83||March 5, 2011 6:57 PM|
The quality has just gone downhill. The articules are boring, the commenters (what's left of them) have nothing interesting to say, and the writing is dull.%0D %0D I find myself going there about once a day to find anything of interest and then leaving quickly.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||March 7, 2011 8:00 PM|
Is there a golf clap for bad web redesign?
|by Anonymous||reply 85||March 7, 2011 8:06 PM|
How long does it take for your comment to show up when you "start a new discussion?"
|by Anonymous||reply 86||March 8, 2011 8:10 PM|
OMGaaaa, I just went on io9, and they're back to blog format!!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 87||March 30, 2011 2:08 AM|
I haven't even bothered to check them in weeks.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||March 30, 2011 2:13 AM|
Gawker's back to normal, too.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||March 30, 2011 2:20 AM|
Not for me.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||April 1, 2011 1:59 PM|
Gizmodo has been hopped up on the hippy lettuce for the last week. Their ads jump in front of articles and make scrolling irritating.
I've thrown the whole batch of them into an RSS reader.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||April 1, 2011 3:02 PM|