Thank you for the post. Jezebel pursued an open secret story inside of an industry that’s incredibly male dominated and where misogynist views (women aren’t and can’t be funny) still exist. The nature of CK’s comedy added icky complexity to the endeavor. Strong CK defenders (outside the comedy world) are to CK what…

Yeah, I can totally see how the story developed the way it did, for both Jezebel and the New York Times. For better or worse, there is a credibility gap here. Jezebel will always (or at least for the foreseeable future) be associated with a family of websites that did things like publish a celebrity’s sex tape without…

Wow I’d never seen that, but I did just finish binge-watching The Newsroom and immediately recognized that they recreated this interview in the show - I hadn’t realized this actually happened in real life. I cannot believe she actually spoke the same words they used on The Newsroom, which I had totally. assumed were…

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?

That’s not what I said. Read what I said and come up with a more thoughtful response. You’re intentionally dumbing down my comments in order to make it sound like I’m just an idiot.

I’m commenting on my own comment because I had more to say. Watch that clip. Has the root of the message being delivered by Kimmel changed? I STILL see headlines like this on jezebel. It really bothers me that this website would get sanctimonious toward their readers when they post some of the headlines that they do.…

I got it mixed up with the other paper that broke a story about a famous man being accused of sexual misconduct. Me culpa. My point stands, though, and your (and Jezebel’s) attempt to deflect from that point based on a trivial mistake is frankly pure cowardice.

“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…

Two publications that both broke stories about public figures committing sexual misconduct within hours of each other. It’s an easy mistake to make and it doesn’t make their criticism any less valid. 

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.

This is actually a pretty transparent apology* for him.

Your decision to abbreviate the word “unfortunately” (and only that word) is even more unsettling than this guy’s remarks.

Then a hurricane came, and devastation reigned, our man saw his future drip, dripping down the drain. Put a pencil to his temple, connected it to his brain, and he wrote his first refrain, a testament to his pain.

Should’ve been you, Curt Schilling.

And Brian McCann’s tenacious baserunning would be earmarked forever in history

Man, shut the fuck up.

We here in Houston are perfectly happy with the thought of this World Championship keeping us feeling better about our situation for the next few years. I’m sorry our one bright spot this year bugs you so much.

Go baseball! You are fun! I will miss you!