Did I read the wrong article? Because Geithner didn’t attempt to get favorable treatment for the escort. He bolted when that guy went off on his “I know who you are” text assault.

http://gawker.com/conde-nasts-cf…

Did you see the article about the Conde Nast dude on Gawker’s main page? Gawker helped an escort blackmail and out some unknown guy who works for a rival media company. Gawker Media has yet to apologize, or even address the issue again, but Natasha Vargas-Cooper was defending that article on Twitter last night.

You realize it’s possible to be strongly anti-Gamergate and also strongly against Gawker outing a private citizen for fun and profit, right? Especially since said private citizen works for a Gawker competitor, and said outing aids and abets the work of a felony blackmailer?

THIS. Natasha....dear...fuck yourself.

“outing a philaderer” is a hell of a euphemism for collaborating with a blackmailing grifter to destroy someone’s life for no reason but clicks. The obvious hypocrisy is that Gawker now feels an ethical obligation to protect the identities of the victims and not publish stolen nude videos, a policy it apparently…

Note: While there is a slight difference between this piece and the Gawker piece - in that the man being written about here did not contact Jezebel first to extort anyone, and he has [allegedly lololol] been doing illegal things, there is still SO MUCH HYPOCRISY here, and especially from you, Natasha, that all of the…

Redacting names to protect people during potential investigations and legal litigation that there is no confirmation of here...

“...we are protecting their identities while they pursue legal action”

So you’ll protect and aide one criminal in blackmail, but not the peeper creeper?

Serious question for Natasha: if Roy had contacted you with these pictures and told you that he was attempting to blackmail one of the women but they wouldn’t pay him, would you have published his pictures of the woman in question and kept his identity secret?

We've seen your Twitter Natasha. You have no issues protecting people who sexually prey on others.

Natasha, you just wrote that: “Stories don’t need an upside. Not everyone has to feel good about the truth. If it’s true, you publish.” However, this story involves a plea of “no contest,” thereby rendering these ALLEGATIONS unproven. Your headline implies that all of these accusations have been proven in a court of…

Kindly go fuck yourself Natasha. You are as much of a shit stain as the asshole you are writing about.

You all should help with the blackmail.

This is Good job.

Warning, this was posted on Gawker...

Only a matter of time before some 4chan board decides to mass-suicide one weekend and ruin everyone’s fun.