She’s mad because Jezebel didn’t listen when she said, “No.” Shouldn’t be hard to understand.

This. THIS.

For me, the issue was always with how Gawker/Jezebel handled the Kirkman story rather than the need to believe that Louis was innocent. I don’t know if it was intentional or not, but I’ve read several articles on these sites where that Kirkman comment was contributed to being about Louis even after she denied that who…

No offense, but if I was a victim of sexual harassment (or pretty much anything else), I would be much more likely to go on record with a 166 year old print newspaper journalist than I would a website journalist. Especially if it meant that fucking it up could mean the end of my career or libel lawsuits.

I guess I don’t get how you can play the “we’re doing real journalism” card when the NY Times busted the story wide-open with 5 sources in what, a few weeks since the Weinstein stuff broke? And you’ve supposedly had it for years?

I don’t think I’m going to be crying over Kirkman’s treatment of Jezabel, sorry. Sounds like ya’ll sicced the flying monkeys on her and then said “well we didn’t tell them to bite you!” when she got mad. The fact that she screwed up the exact particulars of which monkey bit who, when, while recounting it in a heated…

People have the right to tell their own stories when they are ready to tell them. Reporting those stories without their permission, reporting them as rumors or “open secrets” is unfair to the victims and can even undermine their story when/if they’re ready to tell it. It may actually cause harm to the victims. Why…

No, as I’ve said before, if there is a rumor they should have jumped in with both feet. They should have gone to female comics and male comics. They should have talked with workers at comedy clubs and festivals. They should have made the fact that some rumors have been disavowed by women while stating that the fact…

“Our readers don’t have to and shouldn’t take our word on something just because we publish it”

Maybe this very old clip will help you understand where some of the skepticism of your ethical standards originated. Jezebel (and Gawker) had legitimate journalism issues. And you know what? So does the NYTimes, WSJ, etc. You are held to higher standards and when you fail, you NEED to be called out on it. A lot of…

I will not condemn a man on rumor alone.

I’m sorry. I like this site. But to be clear, you have been horrible to Kirkman (including linking to a rumor she specifically denied several times when writing about CK) and you did go about journalism the wrong way while the NYT did it the right way.

Here’s the simple fact: The Washington Post did journalism the right way, and Jezebel did not.

From the WaPo article: “Corfman, 53, who works as a customer service representative at a payday loan business, says she has voted for Republicans in the past three presidential elections, including for Donald Trump in 2016.”

Seemed fairly obvious to me at least that Xi was catering to trump’s narcissism with all the pageantry and hoopla. Header photo shows Xi’s barely concealed disgust and trump’s oblivious shit eating grin. They also cut out a lot of his live speech on Chinese tv.

Yeah I know the tabloids go nuts over “work-shy Will” or whatever but I follow the Kensington palace social media accounts and Will and Harry are always doing something it seems, at least every other day. They do a lot of work with mental health in particular, and also have taken over a lot of the charities Diana used…

.......and her promise at 21......it is “a job for life”........

The Queen is in a terrible position. She works her ass off at official events and the like because she knows she has a mandatory duty that has some perks. Her children and grandchildren think of being royal as a perk that has occasional, optional duties.

Elizabeth won’t step down because of the object lesson of the Duke of Windsor. It’s also just not a thing British monarchs do; it’s not part of their tradition.

The Queen hasn’t abdicated because she believes that being the monarch is a lifetime appointment. She has said that if she were to become incapacitated, there would be a regency, where Charles rules in her name, but she will be the Queen until she dies.