Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gawker.com To End Operations Next Week (gawker.com)

Posted by msmash on from the end-of-era dept.

After nearly 14 years of operations, Gawker.com will be shutting down next week, the company's outgoing CEO Nick Denton told the staff Thursday. The decision comes days after Univision said it would buy Gawker Media properties -- Gizmodo, Jezebel, Kotaku etc (but not Gawker.com) -- for a sum of $135 million. The publication is currently in the middle of multiple lawsuits, with billionaire Peter Thiel revealing his clandestine legal campaign against the company. In a blog post, Gawker made the announcement. From the story:Nick Denton, the company's outgoing CEO, informed current staffers of the site's fate on Thursday afternoon, just hours before a bankruptcy court in Manhattan will decide whether to approve Univision's bid for Gawker Media's other assets. Staffers will soon be assigned to other editorial roles, either at one of the other six sites or elsewhere within Univision. Near-term plans for Gawker.com's coverage, as well as the site's archives, have not yet been finalized.

5 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. As a former journalist, this isn't a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gawker was largely a trash publication and provided little value journalistically. It was largely a place for snobs to act like jerks. They messed up publishing that Hulk Hogan video.

    1. Re:As a former journalist, this isn't a big deal by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Gawker was largely a trash publication and provided little value journalistically. It was largely a place for snobs to act like jerks.

      You just described about 95% of "new media"

    2. Re:As a former journalist, this isn't a big deal by Woldscum · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And nothing of value was lost

    3. Re: As a former journalist, this isn't a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The takeaway to gawkers demise is that publishing something that is true does not protect you from liability. Much like libel and slander which protect a persons right not to be lied about, people have a right to privacy with things done in the privacy of their bedroom. If gawker had just reported on the existence of the sex tape and that they had verified it's authenticity, that would have been journalism and they would have been protected. The fact that they distributed the actual video without iron clad rights to do so (i.e. signed contract with all those who appear on the video) exposed them to liability by violating Hogan's right to privacy, which everyone has (and which juries tend to protect).

  2. Re:Freeze Peach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought the answer to speech you don't like was more speech. Not if you're Peter Thiel. He used his money and power to destroy a website because they called him a homo.

    Had nothing to do with free speech. The website published a porno without permission of those in it. The website ignored a judge's order to take it down. The website destroyed itself. Mr. Thiel just helped that along. Think of that the next time you donate to the ACLU to do your bidding.