Here’s why this is such a big deal that ignited the Internet.
If you’ve been on social media over the past 18 hours chances are pretty good you know that last night the website Gawker ran a disgusting story that succeeded in outing a man who is married to a woman, possibly destroying his marriage and family – they have three young children – all while protecting the identity of a gay escort who supplied them with salacious pictures and texts.
The man Gawker’s Jordan Sargent outed is a New York media executive at a Gawker rival. He’s likely not much more of a public figure than you or I, except by birth: his brother is a former Obama Cabinet member.
Long story short, the man in question (we’re not publishing his name or linking to the Gawker piece,) according to Gawker’s story, was arranging to pay for a few hours with this gay escort and willing to pay $2500 cash to do so.
Now, we don’t know if this media executive is gay or bisexual or just fulfilling a one-time fantasy, nor do we know if he and his wife have ever discussed any of this or even if they have an open relationship. Nor is it any of our business, period.
But over at Gawker, they thought it was.
Max Read, Gawker’s Editor-In-Chief, offered this immediate defense last night:
If the subject of the story were an anti-gay politician, or someone who has actively worked to deny LGBT people their rights while hypocritically cheating on his wife, then sure, that’s a valid story.
This was not.
The outrage consumed the Internet, and became a top news story on many news sites and blogs.
A few minutes ago, while the story itself was still listed on Gawker’s sidebar as its top “popular story,” Gawker founder Nick Denton announced they had removed the story and explained why they ran it.
“It was an editorial call, a close call around which there were more internal disagreements than usual. And it is a decision I regret.”
The story involves extortion, illegality and reckless behavior, sufficient justification at least in tabloid news terms. The account was true and well-reported. It concerns a senior business executive at one of the most powerful media companies on the planet.
Leaving out “it was nobody’s business,” Denton noted the backlash from readers has been “intense.”
“Some of our own writers, proud to work at one of the only independent media companies, are equally appalled,” he added.
Mashable notes “Gawker Media’s managing partnership voted 5-1 to take the post down, with executive editor Tommy Craggs being the lone person to vote to keep the post up.”
So, why does this matter?
Gawker is ranked number 76 in total traffic, including its other media sites, like Deadspin, Jezebel, and Gizmodo. Over the past month they’ve reached nearly 16 million people and generated over 90 million page views, according to web traffic measurement site Quantcast.
That’s a tremendous amount of possible or potential damage to do to a rival company’s reputation, and a tremendous amount of likely damage to do to a person who doesn’t deserve it.
UPDATE –
Some responses to the Gawker story via Twitter:
Â
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correctly note the amount of money allegedly involved.