Break Request
From another team’s playbook:
A few cases recently where we’ve thought *way* too much before publishing. Even when we’ve had exclusive information or even documentary evidence. There’s always a good argument for waiting. Let’s check to see whether the associated claim is true; oh, the source might be exposed. But we should publish anyway, making clear what we know to be true and what remains up in the air. Or even just publish a headline or quicklink and fill the story in later. We can always update. We can always write a second post when we’ve established more of the facts.
While we’re at it, ahem:
Denton acknowledged “the irony of us lecturing,” as he put it, and asked, “Is there Gawker ethics? I mean, I guess there’s Gawker ethics. It’s a dangerous thing to talk about.”
Blithe, smug and wrong? Quite the trifecta. This was careful, thorough, and done with due diligence. It was sincere in the mistaken question, and quick to sincerely apologize and correct as such. Yet as it turned out, homeboy was involved, and ended up leading all to the answer. Your premise was sleazy in theory, but nothing nobody’s seen before. You’re mad because the execution was shit, and absolutely squandered any inkling of legitimate potential due to several bush-league calls.
We all fall on our face sometimes, but it’s never the busting ass that’s embarrassing so much as the awkward way you try to cover the fact that it ever happened to begin with. Sometimes, you just gotta sit on the floor and laugh at yourself. But jamming your finger in our face for tripping you? ‘Fuck outta here with that shit.
