When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

November 12, 2010 -

Everyone loves a good rant, but Gizmodo writer Joel Johnson delivers a particularly scathing rebuke to readers and commenters who are often a little self righteous and overly personal when disagreeing with an article. The colorful verbal lashing from Johnson might be considered beyond the pale by some, though. Here's a bit from a section entitled "You Don't Get To Call Us Unprofessional," where the writer questions the readers' intelligence:

It goes like this: 1) We put up a post you don't like. 2) Rather than ignoring the post and enjoying a different post—or in the worst case deciding you do not enjoy the mix of stories of Gizmodo any longer and going somewhere else—you decide to express your dissatisfaction. 3) You accuse us of being unprofessional, typically without any clear indication by which standards of professionalism we are being judged.

To be fair, you are very stupid. When presented with something that does not match your very rigid preconceptions of what should entertain you this very second, you lash out with the all the weaponry at your disposal, spitting flechettes of feeble cruelty at the slightest provocation. If you could, when presented with your french fries on the left side of the plastic tray and not the obviously superior right side, you would reach across the counter and give the cashier's nipples a hard twist. And then call him unprofessional.

But the most disturbing part is about the author suffering a horrible trauma that he shared with readers, who later use it against him when they don't disagree with him over some story, or issue, or company:

So I was raped when I was a kid by a parent and I wrote about it. In case you're wondering: It f*cking sucked, but I'm much better, thank you.

But when I got into a scuffle with some commenters last week they decided to take something I'd written about that experience and use it to suggest to Brian Lam that I have anger issues. They were concerned for me, you see. They suggested therapy for my unresolved issues.

I do have anger issues, you dumb, cruel,, entitled, tunneled vision shit eaters. My anger issues are with you, because you are so foul, so unable to use the internet as a thoroughfare for human compassion or—Christ—even just a civil conversation. It's so far beyond your comprehension that perhaps you are rude or simply wrong that you'd dredge up something that has absolutely no bearing on—wait for it—arguments about gadgets.

Read the whole thing, and before you go off half-cocked and comment, understand that the story is about people going off half-cocked and commenting..

Posted in

Comments

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Good for him!

The sort of moronism he's attacking is the reason why 6 years ago a group of people abandoned xbox.com forums and started a community for mature people. I haven't looked back since.

It's also the reason why I finally got so fed up with half-wits on the Internet and downloaded CommentBlocker 2.0 Firefox add-on. I couldn't be happier (yes, I'm blocking Gizmodo.com comments with it).

-- http://pixelantes.blogspot.com/

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Wow, that was perhaps one of the most unprofessional things I've ever read.  When you try to defend your professionalism you should do it in a professional way.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Or hold your words and say nothing. Remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt.

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

The Glenn Beck of tech journalism.

Let me know when it's time to give a shit.

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

the logic in his rant is scarily similar to other rants that cry foul over the basic rules of criticism.

when he puts up a post, he is opening himself up for criticism, no matter how sophmoric or vulgar. He wants to stand on the soap box but doesn't want any tomatoes thrown at him. can't have it both ways. how does an internat journalist not get that? the fact that he's a journalist and still he doesn't get that very basic concept is the real measure of stupidity (and irony) here.

although irrelevant and inconsiderate, he also made public the facts regarding is childhood trauma. if you don't want it to be used against you, don't post anything publically that can be used against you - another basic rule that appears to be lost on this idiot.

he also had an anger attack back when the ipad got released and many techies were less than enthused. he's like on a hair trigger. but drama generates hits and so he continues to generate news on other sites and therefore still has a job. maybe not so dumb afterall, eh?

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

One of the comments best explains it for me: This kind of writer's rant best left to Facebook or Twitter, not on Gizmodo.

 

No reason to rant like that on a site story.  It only hurts the site's image.  Also, he is feeding the troll.

---------
There are only 10 types of people in this world, people who know binary and people who don't.

---------
There are only 10 types of people in this world, people who know binary and people who don't.

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Beat me to it. I was going to say that the words 'Troll' and 'feeding' spring to mind.

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Hey!  I might be dumb, cruel, and entitled, but my eyesight is 20/20, and I always clean the fertilizer off my goddamn vegetables before I eat them.  Always.

---
Fangamer

---
Fangamer

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

It made me smile.  But yeah, obviously it's pretty thoroughly unprofessional; he's just as bilious as the lowest-common-denominator commenters, he's just smarter and more coherent than they are.

Under the circumstances, his anger's understandable and forgivable.  There's no excuse for dredging up a guy's childhood trauma to try and win an argument.

In short: stop calling me unprofessional, you twats.

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

It's unfortunate that Gizmodo, being the bastion of editorial and journalistic integrity that they are has a problem with the Internet being well...the Internet. If they want to attract a better community, maybe they should look inward and act like proper journalists instead of the lowest common denominator be-first-at-all-costs, typical Gawker site that they are. There's no doubt most comment sections (even ones on good sites) are vile places but that's reality and always has been. If they can't take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen. In the case of Gizmodo I say yes in fact, please DO get out of the kitchen.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
www.digital-lifeline.ca

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

Well I can understand his annoyance, anger, and frustration. However, is this the right way to lash back? 

---------

James Fletcher, member of ECA Canada

Re: When Journalists Attack: Gizmodo

I think this article is completely unprofessional, and the author has issues and should seek help.

Aw come on! Someone had to say it.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Goth_Skunk@eZeek: Noooooooooo.... ;)07/27/2015 - 8:44pm
MechaTama31Re: Google+, wow. I never in a million years thought they would backpedal on that. I just resigned myself to not using commenting functions on any of their services.07/27/2015 - 6:21pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, are you saying all women are fat. ;)07/27/2015 - 5:38pm
benohawkMake it more adorable and more gender neutral! Widescreen Dog and 16:9 their 16 kitten sidekicks07/27/2015 - 5:15pm
Goth_SkunkOr, if you prefer, Widescreen Woman.07/27/2015 - 4:12pm
Goth_SkunkWho will save us from this abominable practice?! Introducing WIDESCREEN MAN and his sidekick 16:9!07/27/2015 - 4:10pm
Andrew EisenInteresting coincidence. I tweeted about the evils of vertically oriented video just last night. https://twitter.com/AndrewEisen/status/62549836960397312007/27/2015 - 4:01pm
PHX Corphttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ_I9-CkzDE The Great Atari Ransack (The Jimquisition) Warning Vertical video syndrome in one scene07/27/2015 - 3:40pm
MattsworknameBout time google07/27/2015 - 3:33pm
james_fudgeugh. TG man :)07/27/2015 - 1:15pm
MechaCrashGoogle drops Google+ requirements for YouTube and other services: http://venturebeat.com/2015/07/27/google-is-dropping-its-google-requirement-across-all-products-starting-with-youtube/07/27/2015 - 12:55pm
benohawkThat still isn't Steam pay royalties. At best it is Bethesda not being willing to relicense the music,07/27/2015 - 12:51pm
Infophile(cont'd) different service. This often happened with TV shows, where music was only licensed for broadcast, but not for DVD release. So for many older shows, they either have to relicense it or use different/no music for the DVD release.07/27/2015 - 12:36pm
Infophile@benohawk: It most likely comes down to the original licensing agreement for the music in it. Often those agreements only license it for the medium it first releases in, so it has to be re-licensed if it's rereleased in a different form or through a ...07/27/2015 - 12:35pm
benohawkWhy would steam be paying royalties on anything in quake?07/27/2015 - 12:01pm
black mantaI recommend using the KMQuake II patch which supports .ogg music files, then downloading the music from someplace, then dropping it in to a music folder into the \baseq2 directory.07/27/2015 - 10:32am
black mantaI got Quake 2 during the Steam Quakecon sale. Funny thing is, there's no music for it! Guess Steam didn't want to pay the royalty fees or something.07/27/2015 - 10:30am
black mantaLike EZK, I also have a backlog of games. Right now I'm playing Crysis 3 for the first time, and replaying Quake 2.07/27/2015 - 10:29am
E. Zachary KnightZippy, No. It is because I have a backlog of games a mile long and have not bought to many new games, which includes Mass Effect.07/27/2015 - 9:28am
ZippyDSMleeE. Zachary Knight: Thats becuse you are in love with your Wii! or was that AE? LOL07/27/2015 - 9:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician