I had a huge knock-down-drag-out with my ex about overpopulation when she wanted to watch that atrocious 19 Kids and Counting or whatever the fuck they call that Fertile Myrtle show. I said it was outlandish and completely irresponsible to have that many children, and she countered with "yeah, but they take care of…

Redemption doesn't mean pretending it didn't happen. Redemption is the fact that he's no longer in jail and is playing Major League Baseball. Redemption doesn't mean that people don't have the right to talk about it, and it certainly doesn't mean that somebody has the right to dictate whether other people talk about…

We'll call it whatever we want. We're the customers, you simply need to improve your product or shut up.

And he doesn't understand Kant for shit. I can tell you that.

#CancelHawkHarrelson

The "precise critiques" that I saw amounted to people being upset that we pointed out that their childhood hero—hey, I was pulling for him against Hogan—was a nutjob, and honestly if we wanted page views we would have just thrown up a "13 Most Awesome Ultimate Warrior Moments EVER" post and watched the Facebook shares…

Ha, "some random questionable things." That's a neat rhetorical trick, there.

You keep saying it was low quality without actually specifying what was low quality about it. The guy was a dick and a loon ("random questionable things" is a neat elision—you're talking about a bigot who was basically Pat Robertson in greasepaint). I'm not sure what you're doing on Deadspin if you expect us to say…

The Incredible Hulk Logan.

Ultimate Wrestler? Is he related to Macho Boy Randy Carriage?

No I was just making a joke. But I can feel your butthurt.

They know. You don't. Shut up.

Norwood's definition of "clickbait" seems more accurate than what you are offering.

"Perhaps if Mr. Marchman worked at a website that didn't engage in such derisive and blithe criticism of everyone on such a regular basis, I'd be willing to acquiesce, but he works for Gawker blogs, where derision and snark routinely serve as a substitute for substantive criticisms.

That's the fucking common usage of the term 'clickbait'. THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE MEANS AND YOU GOT-DAMN WELL KNOW IT.

So you, a journalist, get to sum up the content of your speech in a pithy but possibly misleading fashion for the sake of expediency, but people on the internet don't?

Why say that when click bait says the same thing in 2 syllables?

Why? The one reason I can see for it in the article boils down to it being a derisive and snarky way to make the same criticism, and you as an employee of Gawker have absolutely zero grounds for trying to tell people not to act in that fashion.

Sensationalized headlines used to make not-so-life-or-death stories sound like its LITERALLY LIFE OR DEATH is lame click baity garbage used to drive eyes to stories that don't deserve it.