No, I was hoping to collect salt from the commenters, which worked out nicely. I did not expect the author to reply to a gray. It was a pleasant surprise. :)

I mean, if Gawker had done nothing wrong, then sure, that arguement could hold water. But this is the website that loves to invade privacy like no one’s business. Between Hulk Hogan and then David Geithner, which Gawker had the audacity to act like they were in the right after it being proven the “source” had been…

“The news is out that Gawker Media, our parent company, is up for sale as part of a filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. This was due to an unprecedented legal assault financed in secret by Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel.”

While the whole lawsuit and the issues behind it have truly disgusted me (both sides), I was sincerely hoping that it somehow wouldn’t hurt Kotaku. I would never have discovered Trails in the Sky without Jason, or the Odin Sphere remake without Mike. And many other good things from all of the rest of you. Hoping that…

Never doubt Gawker’s ability to claim the moral high horse even when they’re clearly in the wrong. If the jury that awarded Hogan punitive damages consisted of the entire population of the United States, they’d still blame an assault by rich people for losing the case.

That said, I don’t blame Kotaku or the other…

They’ll never admit wrongdoing, especially the sister-sites like Kotaku that weren’t involved but are negatively affected.
Not only did they lose the case, the judge - and later a jury - actually gave Hogan MORE in damages than he was seeking, and not by a little. It’s pretty black-and-white how badly you need to have…

YOU now have to pay lawyers lots of money to defend you in court. Even if you win, that’s expensive. And they keep doing it. Eventually, you’re out of money - even if you’ve actually done nothing wrong - because of paying to defend yourself.

Yeah. I have no desire to see Kotaku die, but Gawker brought this on themselves. They have no one to blame but themselves in this.

It was a legal assault due entirely to the fact that Gawker screwed over two multi-millionaires in morally repugnant ways and somehow didn’t consider the potential consequences.

This was due to an unprecedented legal assault financed in secret by Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel.

This response is almost identical to Deadspin’s. It’s almost like you were all instructed to give this reassuring comment in case people start fleeing to soon.

Legal assault as a result of...

That does not logically follow. Yes, if Kotaku really published the article, they’d be making light of rape. But the satire’s whole point is that, by constantly crying foul regarding gender politics, Kotaku makes light of real issues (including rape) for political gain..

Well, if there is just someone spamming “rape” for no reason, then those other images sound pretty bad. I haven’t seen them though.

You seem like a mean-spirited individual , too. What’s the deal with progressive, tolerant individuals being so intolerant? :)

You seem like a pretty mean-spirited person, so I’ll just say I felt the article was amusing, not because it “made light of rape,” but because it poked some fun at the rather low quality of progressive political journalism that sometimes interferes with this site’s games coverage. They should leave that type of stuff…

I strongly disagree that mentioning rape in the context of satire is “making light of rape.” I think that line of thinking is the antithesis of the “progressive” thinking you seem to support — it would threaten to silence creative satire because of some abstract opposition to the use of a word in an unfamiliar context.

Or it is making fun of a writer who might equivocate rape and dieing in a video game. Not the act of rape.

Unfortunately it looks like Gawker might not survive the year after this Hogan trial.

How did this “make light of rape,” exactly? All I see is mockery of Kotaku’s infusion of progressive gender politics into video game journalism.