To be honest I’m still in shock. I’ve already backed up the whole article in case Gawker forces them to pull it down

Gawker absolutely decides not to report on important topics. Gawker is just made up of a bunch of angry, left wing bloggers. They report what they think matters and it’s rarely anything but republicans bad, democratics good.

A lot of the media surpresses the news that would hurt the candidated they support. The MSM coverup of negative news about Obama and Clinton for example.

I agree, surprised as well.

Don’t let this news story sway you : Gawker is worse than Facebook - and will always be. How hard is that to understand? Throwing bones to the starving - that’s all this story really is.

Interesting, all I ever see are Entertainment/celebrity bs and video links, tbh.

They do with comments that’s for sure...

i see slate and salon there quite often.....

Nothing says that Gawker is innocent of this practice, just that they didn’t here. My trust in Gawker has certainly increased though.

“I would have predicted a Gawker site to participate in the very same hide-newsworthy-conservative-subjects editorializing that apparently Facebook did.”

They aren’t a private company (but not that that matters, just pointing it out). But completely agree.... they make a *lot* of money on people visiting several minutes every day. If they become known as a left-leaning biased site, they could potentially slaughter half of their user base. And, since it’s a public…

I don’t really think *this* is a problem... they can put forth whatever they want in their trending sections, just like CNN and FoxNews can put whatever they want in their content.

I agree but one time does not make the standard though...would have been more impressive it was launched under the Gawker banner

Technically, there’s nothing wrong with Gawker doing it, but since Facebook is a social media site, it’s a bit different to suppress the speech and sharing occurring on the site.

Based on Gawker’s comment section, the news is only being consumed from one site.

It’s not simply a matter of getting ‘news’. Facebook is attempting to influence opinions as to what are acceptable views. Many people can be pressured by constantly being hit with only the “proper” (in Facebook’s opinion) information.

Yea. I mean this is shady but if you are getting your news just from Facebook, or like you said any one source, you run this risk.

Of course FB is manipulative and unethical. I don’t think they’ve ever really hid that part of their business model. I run the page of a non-profit and they’re constantly trying to draw more money out, be it by encouraging like farming or manipulating paid reach. FB is slimy as all get out, but what is anyone going to…

I use /pol/ on 4chan. It appears the Jews are always to blame for some reason.

Kudos to Gizmodo for giving this issue a serious examination. I admit that I would have predicted a Gawker site to participate in the very same hide-newsworthy-conservative-subjects editorializing that apparently Facebook did. Thanks for proving me wrong.