Gawker Apparently Thinks Opposing Gay Marriage Is Worse Than Being a Skinhead
That’s the only way I can pair this story from today…
with this one from two years ago.
The first headline is from a story on the suspension of an editor for Vox Media’s Eater.com, after it came to light that he was the lead singer in a skinhead punk band in the 1980’s. “I am sorry to the people who were the target of my hateful speech then, and its equivalents and legacy today,” Nick Solares wrote in an apology posted to the site.
By contrast, Gawker’s 2014 piece was ecstatic that CEO Brendan Eich was forced out of his position at Mozilla for donating to an anti-gay marriage ballot measure years earlier. “Good for Mozilla, good for OkCupid, and good for everyone, really. Now let’s do racism next!” they wrote.
So being anti-gay marriage at the same time Barack Obama was merits being hounded from the company you helped get off the ground, but neo-Nazism is a youthful dalliance. Gotcha.
I’ll give Gawker a little bit of slack, given that it’s two separate authors who might just have different views on the matter. But that specific example aside, it’s a very odd take from Gawker, a site that more than once has been an active participant in getting people fired for their private comments. Take the infamous example of the time Gawker doxxed a Reddit commenter for saying things they didn’t like:
Two weeks ago, Gawker journalist Adrian Chen decided to unmask the infamous Reddit troll “Violentacrez” as Michael Brutsch. When Chen contacted him, Brutsch did not attempt to deny the things he had done. He simply begged Chen not to publish his name, citing the costs that publicity would have on his disabled wife. Chen chose to publish the piece—including Brutsch’s pleas and promises to do anything that Chen asked in return for not ruining his life. As expected, Brutsch lost his job and the health insurance that paid for his wife’s care; Chen reported this outcome three days later. Many celebrated this public shaming, ecstatic to see a notorious troll grovel.
You have to assume that at best they foresaw that the man they outed would almost certainly would get fired, and at worst were actively hoping for that exact outcome. But now employers shouldn’t judge personal beliefs and actions, because a well-liked guy in the digital media scene is the victim of the witch-hunt? Come on.
[Image via screengrab]
>>Follow Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) on Twitter
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.