“Did she steal something on her way out?” asked a Gawker commenter. Apparently, yes: I took that website’s integrity, dignity, and regard for anything resembling accuracy with me.* I just shoved ‘em in my purse on my last day! I also took a stapler.

(*I just realized how pompous that sounds if you don’t think I’m making a joke!  Haha, like Gawker ever had much dignity or integrity. Ok, it had some of those things sometimes, sure, and certainly more than it does now, but yeah, no, that place and my work there were flawed in a million ways. But I never maliciously set out to smear someone or knowingly wrote something innacurate and left it uncorrected.)

19 comments to Ugh.

  • jennifer

    This is about the classiest comment you could have made — congratulations on finding exactly the right words and amount of attention that post deserves, without giving in to the urge (if ever you had it) to use a similar tone or tactic.

  • John Woodward

    You really should return the stapler. That wasn’t very nice.

  • Mike

    Careful. The stapler may be bugged.

  • jennifer

    The added benefit taking the higher ground is that it’s strategically a better position from which to fire in the future (see: Barack Obama).

  • Cecily

    Denton’s just pissed that we all liked you better. You won.

  • Squeela

    I bought a new stapler? But I can’t replace the other stuff!

  • KGL

    No, you’re still a douchbag/tool/starfucker. And self absorbed, did I mention that?

  • omg, ew, you totally are not!! you were the sense, wit, and soul of that site. did i mention wit? now look at their page views, for heaven’s sake, they’re pathetic. and the new commenters, oy.

  • Diana

    You know the weird thing? Through last summer a bunch of us readers felt a pang of sympathy for you and a deeper pang for Henry when you broke up. We didn’t know you personally, and we only knew him by your mention. But he seemed like a good guy. He probably is. Do you ever hang out anymore? Do you email him and ask him how his band is doing? He’s in a band right?

    Isn’t that the strange thing? You linger in a relationship for a long time, maybe longer than you should. You get bored, but there’s a dignity to the boredom. No one can write nasty things about you on the Internet about a solemn five year old relationship. Imagine the Gawker headline, “COUPLE WATCHES FOX NEWS AT 10, GOES TO BED WITHOUT FUCKING.” There’s something to be said for it, the steadiness and calm of a long-standing relationship.

  • disappointed

    The post was nonsense but so is your exclusive claim on integrity and dignity.

  • S.

    granted e. I think you’re a talented writer, but gawker was never possessed of integrity or dignity… even while you were there. you’re as dirty as Denton in that regard. grow up and stop gushing to the world about the minutiae of your sex life (among other things)

  • margaret

    the whole thing is bizarre and retarded. i loved your TMI posts, actually, b/c i loved your take on the world and your life and how you wrote about that; you were funny and sensitive and corny and thoughtful. it’s a nice combo. but, seriously, you threw a lot of crap at people–I get that they were morons, but at some point in your time at gawker it felt like your job was to find the biggest idiots on the internet, poke your finger and laugh, and then 1,000 people would do the same. and then the internet idiot would try to defend himself in some idiot way and then you’d poke your finger and laugh more, then 1000 other people would do the same. you turned into an internet bully; you might as well have dumped milk on the retarded kids in the lunchroom then gone to your cool table and given everyone high fives. i guess when you’re sitting behind a computer (and everyone is frothing at the mouth to anonymously rip apart some douchey obnoxious nobody from nowhere) it doesn’t feel like you’re really being quite so heinous? but sometimes you were. so, yeah, denton’s post was wrong, but so was a lot of what you did at gawker (and what they still do at gawker). it was kind of a turn off for anyone with a brain–which is why i wasn’t surprised when you quit, but still was surprised you got as careless and vicious as you sometimes did.

  • poisson7

    But wait, what was the false thing?!

  • poisson7

    I mean apart from the more figurative “falseness” of nastiness and betrayal in the post, obv.

  • suz

    In Emily’s defense, I too discovered at a young age that being a journalist (or some variant thereof) leads you to do some stupid and mean things. If you want to write as a career, sometimes you make those choices. I always suspected Emily was too sensitive to fare well at Gawker and I can’t say I was surprised when she quit. If you have a conscience, you find another route. If you don’t, you become Nick Denton.

    Emily – you’re doing it right. Go away for a while and hone your craft.

  • Way to stay classy. I read that piece on Gawker, but I couldn’t finish it because a) it was long, b) it was boring and c) I was drunk.

  • Mr. DBH

    The length of the Gawker post is an emblem which indicates an intellectual betrayal, either real or imagined by one or more parties; or an emotive attachment stronger than previously realised. Yeah, wit is such a small word to apply to your work, and there is an undeniable classiness which you bring to the entire situation.
    If you weren’t so hot, people probably wouldn’t be so upset.

  • I don’t really read it anymore. Part of that, of course, is that I’m confined to my little UWS prison stabbing people with things filled with other things and so the Tawdrily Awesome Breakups Of Lit Professors and such have less relevance to my daily life, but most is the emilylessness.

    Did that digit ever heal?

  • DT

    Maybe I missed it somewhere, but I have to know – was it a RED stapler?

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>