On July 23, The New York Times reported that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was facing a “criminal inquiry” from the Department of Justice regarding the way she handled sensitive government correspondence with her private email account. The story, as you might have heard, has since imploded—Clinton was not specifically targeted; there was no criminal inquiry in the first place—and required two serious corrections, a lengthy editors’ note, and an entire column from Public Editor Margaret Sullivan. “We got it wrong,” deputy executive editor Matt Purdy told Sullivan, “because our very good sources had it wrong.”
Thursday night, BuzzFeed news editor Rachel Zarrell reacted to a deadly shooting at a Louisiana movie theater by tweeting, “Don’t pray. Push for gun control” and “If this were someone in my family I’d want every person alive screaming about gun control to anyone who would listen.” Within an hour, however, Zarrell suddenly reversed course by tweeting an apology of sorts to the conservative activist Stephen Miller:
Media trend alert: New York City’s destitute are gross and ruining our fun with their general existence and bad odor. The New York Post has been humping this story in spectacular fashion this week, sticking 16 reporters on one homeless man who pissed in the street like they found JonBenét’s killer. But in their latest issue, New York decided to get in on the hating, too.
Vox sent your dad to review a Taylor Swift concert. Did you know that that pop music makes him feel insecure? I hope the world doesn’t spin off its axis. Unfortunately, your dad did not just write about his fluctuating testosterone levels in his review. He also said that Miley Cyrus and Madonna don’t value themselves and, well, that requires some extra post-publication editing.
Why has the New York Post marshaled at least 16 reporters to bedevil a single homeless man named John Tucker? According to a current Post employee, the person directing the paper’s unbelievably vicious coverage is none other than alleged pig-fucker, proven sink-pisser, and sitting editor-in-chief Col Allan, who is apparently motivated by the fact that Tucker lives in his own neighborhood, the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
A decent way of evaluating a newspaper’s priorities is simply glancing at its front page, where editors typically place the stories they deem most important or newsworthy. Judging from the Saturday and Sunday editions of the New York Post, the most important and newsworthy event in New York City is the existence, and micturition schedule, of a 49-year-old homeless man named John Tucker.
Two years ago, Gawker published a post titled “Did Rebekah Brooks Fuck Rupert Murdoch and His Son Lachlan?” Due to England’s notorious practice of censoring stories that pertain to pending litigation, however, Gawker Media has been blocking IP addresses in the United Kingdom from accessing the story. After we were reminded of this blackout by the commenter PootMcFruitcakesJr—and since the trial has since ended—we are now allowing our U.K. readers to read “Did Rebekah Brooks Fuck Rupert Murdoch and His Son Lachlan?” Enjoy.
Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, who is currently pursuing the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nomination, released a policy paper today laying out specific proposals to better regulate America’s financial industry (e.g., reinstating Glass-Steagall legislation). Good stuff! One problem, though. On his paper’s second page, O’Malley cites a satirical news website—and not just any satirical news website, but probably the worst one.
In April 2014, the media critic Michael Wolff published a column in British GQ about the then-ongoing phone hacking trial against several journalists and editors employed by Rupert Murdoch’s shuttered tabloid News of the World. Titled “The court without the king,” the critical article is now at the center of a complaint lodged by England’s attorney general, whose office believes GQ should be held in “contempt of court” for implying, with Wolff’s column, that Murdoch was somehow culpable for the hacking charges. As reported by the Guardian, the magazine’s publisher Condé Nast is rightfully fighting this accusation. At the same time, and without any public notice, Condé appears to have taken several highly unusual steps to prevent anyone from reading what Wolff wrote.
In late January, BuzzFeed published a lengthy standards and ethics manual, with which the site intended to hold itself accountable for various missteps (such as surreptitiously deleting articles). Unlike most other news outlets that bother with ethics manuals, however, BuzzFeed decided to specify its stance toward a number of social and political issues: “We firmly believe that for a number of issues, including civil rights, anti-racism, and LGBT equality, there are not two sides.”
The last we heard from the music writer who calls himself M.T. Richards, he was harassing the female rapper then-known as Kitty Pryde via email over the July 4 weekend of 2013. Nearly two years to the day, Richard once again rose above the music-writing flotsam thanks to a weird and gross album review published by Spin.
While many Americans were busy celebrating this beautiful nation over the long weekend, Business Insider proclaimed the glory of a breathtaking new airport inside the invincible and triumphant Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, bringing much honor to the Dear Leader and his people. True, the majority of those people will probably never see the O.K.-looking airport-sized sham thanks to the crippling policies of the warmongering dictatorship in which they live. “But what’s really impressive... are its luxury touches,” adds BI.
The jury trial between Gawker Media and Terry Bollea (a.k.a. Hulk Hogan), previously scheduled to begin July 6, has been delayed indefinitely. In a scathing opinion published today—four days prior to the trial’s start—Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal ruled that the Pinellas County circuit court judge overseeing Bollea v. Gawker Media et al, Pamela Campbell, failed to enforce the strict rules governing the scheduling of jury trials.