• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      They did some pretty shitty things when they were owned by Gawker (they actually showed a photo of a rape once) and a lot of people weren’t even aware they changed ownership when Gawker got sued into oblivion. More recently, they spent way, way too much time on celebrity trash reporting, but their reporting on abortion topics was solid if you were willing to wade through the shit. My hope is for much less shit and more of that reporting.

      • jmcs
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh wow, I didn’t know about the rape article, the worst I knew from that era was the article defending domestic violence against men (which is still online without retraction). Gawker Media really was a toxic cesspool.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Definitely. I’m very glad they’re gone, although it’s bullshit that Peter Thiel funded the lawsuit against him after they outed him. Don’t get me wrong, they totally deserved it for what they did with Hulk Hogan (who is also a piece of shit), but I am guessing Gawker would have survived if Thiel hadn’t hired the best lawyers his fortune could buy. It just shows how uneven the justice system is.

          • thrawn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I actually see that case as the other side of that same coin. It’s been a long time but I vaguely recall Gawker featuring other unethical/likely illegal content like that. They were a large company with a legal team though, so they were difficult to challenge.

            That it required someone of that ghoul Thiel’s resources to take them to court demonstrates an unevenness in itself. It’s wildly expensive to sue a large company even if they’re legally in the wrong, granting them a built in protection against claims.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They had some pretty heavy biased reporting. It was a feminist news source, but their version of feminism was pretty toxic. If you weren’t their version of woman (not necessarily in the Trans sense), you were fair game and they attacked you while supporting other women doing very similar things.

      Ultimately they probably caused more harm than good with their articles.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          But it does mean you shouldn’t slut shame woman A for being in playboy and tell woman B to slut it up.

          • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I have no idea what you’re talking about so it doesn’t really make sense to accuse me of defending that.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you’re unsure what they’re saying, maybe you should ask first before justifying your opinion.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m talking about what jezebel did, it wasn’t treating women with kid gloves, it was treating similar acts of women completely differently because one wasn’t their ideal woman.