I don't care for most things.

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.

So much this.

I get why clickbait isn't acceptable to use for some sorts of criticisms, but how do you figure it's not acceptable to use in the case of a misleading headline designed to make people think that a fairly mundane article is not mundane? I take it to mean the same thing. You may not like that it carries with it a much…

Sure, but headlines like "You won't believe what happens in this video!" or "I can't stop looking at this mindboggling picture!" are literally clickbait. If you can't ascertain anything about the content of the article from the headline, then the headline is de facto terrible. It catches your interest in that…

They're Journalists when they want to be taken seriously, and Bloggers when criticized for lack of standards.

"Sometimes things are bad, and this happens repeatedly, so no one should complain ever."

This entire argument seems to teeter on disingenuously misinterpeting what people mean when they use the word clickbait. Clickbait and alluring headlines are not one and the same.

Oh shit! The Gawker family is getting sensitive about called out on their bullshit!

Here journalism = reading reddit. Reposting.

No. I will not shut up. There's a difference between writing a good headline and the "Most amazing story you'll see all day!" garbage HuffPo (and Gawker sometimes) is known for. That is the fucking worst.

I believe this article assumes, wrongly, that the Gawker media properties (Gawker, Deadspin, Jezebel, et al) participate in journalism.

Clickbait I would say is more "This man used to be wearing pants, but you'll never guess what happens next!" and not something that actually describes the story, like "First Theft of Human Glands". That tells me what it's about and I actually want to read more. The former creates some vague nonsense and, yes, while it…

I liked the days when Deadspin remotely kept sports involved in the posts

Great article covering the auto industry!!!11! #gawkerdetroit

"In order to work for Chrysler, you are required to join the Union, in this case UAW. There's no choice – it's a union shop – the employees voted to have it that way and in America that's the way it is," he wrote.

Ah, yes. White liberal guilt. Since I am not a liberal, I do not have guilt on what my ancestors did. One of whom was a high-ranking Confederate official who died 130 years ago. His actions do not affect my own.

Don't try to understand Gawker's white guilt.

Question: Is the imitation of a cartoon mascot which is itself an imitation of a stereotype which is itself an imitation of real people still racist? If they had dressed like Skids and Mudflap from Transformers would it still be racist? Honest questions here, just trying to get my head around this.

Wow, Chris Brown is gonna be hella disappointed when he finds out beating cancer isn't what he thinks it is.