Dude, who even knows.
Link with 1 note
On Gawker’s Problem With Women — Matter →
Interesting, might give off enough heat to make popcorn, who knows.
The pullquote:
So it’s hard to be mad at anyone specific, because these men who are nurtured within a system of wildly pervasive but wholly tacit male favoritism get the best of both worlds. They get to make a show of being progressive and they also get to reap the benefits of a system they’re supposedly fighting against.”
Here’s a thought: a year ago, circa Gamergate, I predicted that while Gawker wouldn’t apologize they would quietly back off the culture war stuff now that they were taking lumps for it, and said Pareene would be a better custodian of the brand voice.
So reading this I discover they installed Pareene last month, and then this:
In January, a black senior editor at Gawker.com, Jason Parham, wrote a post on his personal blog called Gawker Media’s Responsibility to Diversity, one that later inspired Cook’s release of Gawker’s diversity statistics. He was concerned in part by the creation of a new executive editorial team — cheekily called the Politburo, and featuring five male editors and two women editors — reflected a waning interest in editorial diversity. Nick Denton responded in a comment on Parham’s post with this:
“Let’s welcome, if not out-and-out racists, then at least the wide array of people with whom a conversation is possible: national greatness conservatives, Burkean Tories and business pragmatists, for instance; Christians and other spiritual people; economic liberals, libertarians and techno-utopians; and black and other social conservatives.”Instead of focusing on a simple request, one familiar to any self-aware media company in 2015 — a commitment to “publishing and hiring more Latina voices, queer voices, black voices, and marginalized voices across its core sites” — Denton waved his hand and advocated for more or less the opposite.
So, was I wrong?
yourunderworldusa liked this
kontextmaschine posted this