Deadspin Blows Up

[Edgy MD]

https://deadspin.com/Deadspin staffers, given a mandate to stick to sports from the parent company who bought them up, responded (

or not) by https://www.lex18.com/news/national/deadspin-revolts-and-editor-fired-over-stick-to-sports-mandateblanketing the site in non-sports content. This included the prominent re-positioning of the https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/the-adults-in-the-room-1837487584Fuck these dipshits, I quit article that former editor-in-chief Megan Greenwell submitted on the way out the door this past summer, and which her interim replacement Barry Petchesky had the stones to quickly publish and feature with a strong social media push.



Petchesky was probably signing his own death warrant at the time, but now his head has in fact rolled in the wake of the staff revolt.



The Gizmodo Media Group are part of the https://www.digitalwritersunion.org/digital writers union (and fucking well done to them for that), wielding a collective bargaining agreement, so expect some well-written counter-attacks. As of now, all the content at the top of the page has been tagged STICK TO SPORTS.



This has probably been simmering far longer than since the Greenwell resignation, with the writing staff

openly questioning the business model imposed on the site as well as pushing back against attempted corporate editorial interference.



Expect this to play out online even more than in the courts and arbitration rooms, because this group has not only learned to do their fighting in print, but they are also prolific as hell. And if more heads roll, it'll take them about two seconds to get a new site up and running and even some sponsorship on board. In the meantime, look for regular updates at https://awfulannouncing.com/online-outlets/g-o-media-fires-barry-petchesky-from-deadspin-for-not-sticking-to-sports.htmlAwful Announcing.


https://twitter.com/barry/status/1189224064788979712

[nymr83]

if they dont like the rules they should start their own site. I see this as KARMA for 99% of their Mets content being so negative!

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: And if more heads roll, it'll take them about two seconds to get a new site up and running and even some sponsorship on board

Will it though? I mean, maybe they can poach some sponsors but to the tune of the same income they were making? Especially with the breadth of the place. And was it even technically profitable?



I wondered that orginally, when Gawker was 'gone', why they didn't just call it something else? Less adherence to the brand/media company, more to the writer. You can (if you're an asshole billionaire or VC guy) silence a media company but you can't silence a writer.





Looks like maybe Farmer's Insurance has canceled an ad deal.



Also Deadspin was mostly drivel and clickbait, the site was a disaster from a user prospective, it was disorganized as hell if you actually did want primarily sports. The comment section was an arbitrary and elitist mess. There was an occasional good article but I was turned off so much by the overall tone and rampant meanness to it that I rarely checked it out.

[Edgy MD]

if they dont like the rules they should start their own site. I see this as KARMA for 99% of their Mets content being so negative!

The rules are in their collective bargaining agreement. It's not the writers that violated them, but the management.



https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/screen-shot-2019-10-30-at-2.42.17-pm.png>

[kcmets]

Maybe a few of the fired 'spinners can pool their resources and start

their own site at getalifealready.com!

[Edgy MD]

That's genius.

[kcmets]

25,000 U$ plus 5% of gross monthly ad revenue for five years.

[Guest 41Forever]

=Ceetar post_id=25491 time=1572460652 user_id=102]
There was an occasional good article but I was turned off so much by the overall tone and rampant meanness to it that I rarely checked it out.

[Ceetar]

I"m fine with snark and sarcasm, Deadspin just had a meanness to it. That 'civil and thoughtful' discussion was mostly not that either. Society has as a whole gone to a more real. In part because we've learned that someone just made up the 'rules' of civility as a way to look down on others and thoughtful discussion was mostly because dissented voices were more easily silenced.



People talk about social media 'bubbles' now but hell, 20 years ago most of the news culture was fed to you by mostly rich white men.



It's not that nastiness has replaced something civil, it's that it's a lot easier for people to point that the people that claim they're above it all actually aren't.

[Edgy MD]

Deadspin has plenty of thoughtfulness to it. It is less snarky and sarcastic than it is frank and profane. To the extent that they are snarky, they're sort of meta-snarky: For instance they open the football season by doing profiles of each team from the perspective of each and every one of them sucking, calling the series WHY YOUR TEAM SUCKS. It has some of my favorite writers in addition to folks I don't care for, and their bullshit meter is almost always calibrated to a level several places past the decimal point. In a world of Stephen A. Smith on TV, and Bill Madden winning a Spink Award, I find them far less foul than a lot of other media I could plug into.



The comments section is, well ... it's really hard to find an outlet that puts much energy into curating the comments section.



While the quality of Deadspin isn't really the subject here, the challenge of surviving in the digital media age is. I nonetheless can link to multiple stories that will make you weep, quit your job, lose 40 pounds, live in a monastery, change your children's names, dedicate yourself to a life of the mind, and thank the author for all of it.

[G-Fafif]

I don't get the value in buying Deadspin and telling them to stop being Deadspin, which is their core competency.

[Ceetar]

well yeah, Magary is awesome. He's got that snarky, but don't take all this stuff so seriously, tone down just right. But he's not the asshole working in LOLMets takes into every tangential baseball post. There are good writers, then there are writers that just go with the tone and it just comes off mean and nasty because they don't actually have anything to _say_ they just know how to say it to fit in.



He's not the one pulling down posts over the editors head (what this is _really_ about).



Nor is he responsible for one of the worst site layouts imaginable, going back years and years now. Nor is he responsible for the arbitrary comment section that just randomly selects some people to comment and not others. He's not writing entire articles that are just rankings designed to get people mad enough to click on them to argue about.



Nor is he responsible for spamming the main 'Deadspin' page with all manner of nonsense from across the portfolio, so that if you did want to read about sports, you'd have to cycle through nonsense and every other post was a sponsored ad.

[G-Fafif]

[Ceetar]

gotta think the Union would've preferred they stay and fight.

[Frayed Knot]

DEADSPIN has never been on my radar, so I'm pretty much ignorant and/or indifferent to all of this.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

It's never been my cup of meat but I can support edit teams standing up to bad bosses.



That whole group has published a lot of garbage over the years and called it brilliant journalism

[LWFS]

I mean, they've also published a bunch of brilliant journalism. Frank and profane most of the time, frank and profane and silly and weirdly touching at their best.



If nothing else, there's the lesson here that there's still value in standing up to the powerful and shitty.

[bmfc1]

Drew Magary resigned from Deadspin today.

[Edgy MD]

GetaLifeAlready.com just got that much bigger.

[Willets Point]

I always conflated Deadspin with Barstool, so I never read it. Apparently, I was way off the mark.

[Guest 41Forever]

=Ceetar post_id=25504 time=1572473981 user_id=102]
I"m fine with snark and sarcasm, Deadspin just had a meanness to it. That 'civil and thoughtful' discussion was mostly not that either. Society has as a whole gone to a more real. In part because we've learned that someone just made up the 'rules' of civility as a way to look down on others and thoughtful discussion was mostly because dissented voices were more easily silenced.



People talk about social media 'bubbles' now but hell, 20 years ago most of the news culture was fed to you by mostly rich white men.



It's not that nastiness has replaced something civil, it's that it's a lot easier for people to point that the people that claim they're above it all actually aren't.

[Double Switch]

=41Forever post_id=25606 time=1572542148 user_id=69]
I do know, after working in the media for years, that if people are focused on how you are saying something instead of what you are saying, you are not effectively conveying your message and your impact is diminished.

[dinosaur jesus]

Deadspin was never "just sports." That was the point. The new owners don't care about that. Their only interest is in making money off the name. Which makes no sense, because the name means something only to readers who don't want "just sports."



I enjoyed Deadspin. The snark could get pretty rote. But there were good writers there. Magary, of course. And David Roth, their resident Mets fan.



I can't take complaints about profanity seriously. Really creative profanity is a glorious thing, and the Deadspin guys could get creative.

[Edgy MD]

Willets Point wrote: I always conflated Deadspin with Barstool, so I never read it. Apparently, I was way off the mark.

Deadspin writers revile Barstool as a safe place for meatheaded misogyny, but it wouldn't be unfair to suggest that they helped paved the way for the latter, in the way envelope-pushing good things often inadvertently (but not necessarily blamelessly) pave the way for hateful bad things in our culture.

[G-Fafif]

New Republic weighs in...



https://newrepublic.com/article/155565/deadspinhttps://newrepublic.com/article/155565/deadspin

Over more than a decade, Deadspin has built an audience with hilarious and incisive coverage that is focused on sports but drifts into a number of other areas—politics, film, dogs. Its coverage of President Trump has been particularly excellent (and consistently well-read), but the site has also featured a number of other popular non-sports features, from its pop culture coverage in The Concourse to Drew Magary's annual hate-reading of the Williams-Sonoma catalog. G/O responded to the success of Deadspin's non-sports pieces by ... telling it to stick to sports. In a memo sent to staff on Monday, its editorial director Paul Maidment wrote, “To create as much great sports journalism as we can requires a 100 percent focus of our resources on sports. And it will be the sole focus. Deadspin will write only about sports and that which is relevant to sports in some way.” The brilliant thinking behind the memo: Take the stuff that made Deadspin unique and indispensable and profitable and throw it in the trash.

[LWFS]

41Forever wrote: I do know, after working in the media for years, that if people are focused on how you are saying something instead of what you are saying, you are not effectively conveying your message and your impact is diminished.

But judging from the reaction here and across the internet... do you think that's the case here?

41Forever wrote: But it seems to me that if the owners want to have a sports website, and readers are seeking a sports website as a respite from what's in their face everywhere else, then it's not unreasonable to request employees post sports-related stories.

The new owners are a private equity group that has previously gone (or tried to go) the content-farm route with their acquisitions (see Forbes.com for the former, and the LA Mothertrucking Times for the latter). Use your experience in journalism to tell me what you think is more likely: that they're taking a bold new step toward a streamlined New Sports Journalism, or that they're clearing the decks?

[Guest 41Forever]

41Forever wrote: I do know, after working in the media for years, that if people are focused on how you are saying something instead of what you are saying, you are not effectively conveying your message and your impact is diminished. But judging from the reaction here and across the internet... do you think that's the case here? 41Forever wrote: But it seems to me that if the owners want to have a sports website, and readers are seeking a sports website as a respite from what's in their face everywhere else, then it's not unreasonable to request employees post sports-related stories. The new owners are a private equity group that has previously gone (or tried to go) the content-farm route with their acquisitions (see Forbes.com for the former, and the LA Mothertrucking Times for the latter). Use your experience in journalism to tell me what you think is more likely: that they're taking a bold new step toward a streamlined New Sports Journalism, or that they're clearing the decks?

Now, I had the caveat that I wasn't really familiar with the site, and the first quote was from a conversation with Ceets about meanness in the media replacing thoughtful discourse. The reaction across the net -- and here -- makes it seem like there were a lot of people who liked the site. It just wasn't one of the ones I check out.



My experience in journalism would lead me to think that many companies buying media outlets today are slashing costs and pushing out veterans. The recent changes at Sports Illustrated don't sound good. My family has been very much affected by the downsizing in the industry. My wife and I were both journalists. Note that is in the past tense. I didn't say anything about streamlined New Sports Journalism. Remember, I noted that I had no idea what percentage of the site was devoted to non-sports issues in prior years, and how it compares to today.

[G-Fafif]

I'd recommend anything Bryan Curtis writes about anything to anybody, but this, on what becomes of media when it's gobbled up by those who don't care for it, serves as outstanding explanation.



https://www.theringer.com/2019/10/31/20942249/deadspin-g-o-media-fired-quit-sports-illustrated-maven-sports-mediahttps://www.theringer.com/2019/10/31/20942249/deadspin-g-o-media-fired-quit-sports-illustrated-maven-sports-media

Whether non-sportswriting attracts readers, as former acting editor Barry Petchesky argued, is almost beside the point. Mavened publications want traffic but not thoughts. The “incredibly broad mandate” G/O Media's owners claimed to have granted Deadspin's staff is illusory. For them, the worst thing a website could generate is a mild headache—mild and major headaches being pretty much the point of journalism.

[Edgy MD]

=41Forever post_id=25606 time=1572542148 user_id=69]But it seems to me that if the owners want to have a sports website, and readers are seeking a sports website as a respite from what's in their face everywhere else, then it's not unreasonable to request employees post sports-related stories.

[Edgy MD]

G/O's statement to The New York Times:

They resigned and we're sorry that they couldn't work within this incredibly broad coverage mandate. We're excited about Deadspin's future and we'll have some important updates in the coming days.

So, they've apparently hired President Trump as a publicist.