Enter your username and password.
Rosa, that's disgusting... you really should get this post down, seriously.
I have no problems with the jokes and stuff here on Gizmodo, but this is tabloid level. Do you guys really want to go there? Reply
I have no problems with the jokes and stuff here on Gizmodo, but this is tabloid level. Do you guys really want to go there? Reply
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: I think it's humanizing.
It doesn't even once mention his strawberry tattoo! Reply
It doesn't even once mention his strawberry tattoo! Reply
@ElroyStubbern: Makes me sad. I mean, I know I have no say in what they do or don't post - but I'd feel less bad if Giz started posting pornography or publicity-only posts than publishing personal messages from someone's cellphone, no matter who it was.
I mean, think of how anyone - Giz reader, Giz writters - would feel not only having their personal stuff posted on the Internet, but also being mocked for them.
I know this isn't professional journalism nor I expect it to be, but I though there were some ethical guideliness... apparently I was wrong. Reply
I mean, think of how anyone - Giz reader, Giz writters - would feel not only having their personal stuff posted on the Internet, but also being mocked for them.
I know this isn't professional journalism nor I expect it to be, but I though there were some ethical guideliness... apparently I was wrong. Reply
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: What do you mean? Rosa whines about her personal stuff in public all the time! And anyway, be aware that all these lurid essemmesses and more appeared in the New York Post. There's hardly such a thing as "professional journalism" to be found out there. I know what you mean, though. I never want to be publicly recognizable, because once you're in the spotlight, your clothes all fall off, and everybody has front-row tickets and spyglasses. And also you're covered in baby oil.
Reply
@ElroyStubbern: Indeed.
Maybe I was delusional or something, and I know those are hard choices (to publish or not)... but somehow I thought Gizmodo was the type of blog I was not going to find this sort of stuff.
I'm still a Giz fan and all, but the fact that publishing a guy's private messages disgusts me won't change.
You know, one thing is to go ahead and talk about your private life by your own will... but it's a totally different thing to have your private life out there without consent - which seems to be the case, forgive me if I'm wrong.
I read and checked the New York Post source, but that doesn't make less disgusted. It's about what was done, not who did it.
But nevermind... I have a personal stance against the whole celebrity culture. Reply
Maybe I was delusional or something, and I know those are hard choices (to publish or not)... but somehow I thought Gizmodo was the type of blog I was not going to find this sort of stuff.
I'm still a Giz fan and all, but the fact that publishing a guy's private messages disgusts me won't change.
You know, one thing is to go ahead and talk about your private life by your own will... but it's a totally different thing to have your private life out there without consent - which seems to be the case, forgive me if I'm wrong.
I read and checked the New York Post source, but that doesn't make less disgusted. It's about what was done, not who did it.
But nevermind... I have a personal stance against the whole celebrity culture. Reply
@kingbob337: Right? I do think it's kinda gauche to publish this sort of thing, but I think to pay it too much attention, positive or negative, is to play into the bullshit cultural double standard that has everybody simultaneously ashamed of and obsessed with sex. Sure, this is a series of private exchanges between lovers, but it's also reads like "Young Adult" fiction. By labeling what is, realistically speaking, PRETTY vanilla stuff as "too naughty" or "unfit for print", we're ultimately lowering our tolerances for reality by letting ourselves be scandalized by harmless sexual banter. Essentially, we're abandoning our raw, sometimes ugly humanity in favor of the bland, artificial stimulation offered up by the media. In their natural element, people have the ability to articulate, devise, and perform tasks vastly filthier and more enriching than the New York Post, or some dull-eyed golfer with a Sidekick ever could.
Reply
@ElroyStubbern:
I dunno if the reply had anything to do with my comment, but just to make things clear...
It had nothing to do with the sexual content (or lack thereof).
I wasn't offended by the content.
Really. I read through way worse stuff around. And must admit I actually wrote way worse stuff than those messages.
The thing that got me disgusted is the act of PUBLISHING Tiger Wood's personal stuff. It wouldn't matter to me if it was similar to some very raunchy literature with tits and ass or even worse stuff, or if it was some very innocent love messages.
It's the right of privacy that so many people defend but couldn't careless when it comes to a public figure I'm talking about.
It'd be the same to me if the messages published were his romantic case with his lover, or a discussion with his mom about when he's visiting her (though I'm pretty shure something like that would never make the news).
I'm all for openly discussing taboos... probably even more than the average guy. But privacy is one thing I'll always defend.
Like, I'd have no problem at all if the guy decided himself to publish the messages to the press, on a book or whatever... in fact, I doubt I would even read the whole thing and post a comment about it since celebrity stuff never really catches my interest.
What caught my eye though, is the fact that someone dug the info and felt it was alright to publish it. Something that, if happened to me, would result in lawsuits and everything in my power to prevent from happening to others. Reply
I dunno if the reply had anything to do with my comment, but just to make things clear...
It had nothing to do with the sexual content (or lack thereof).
I wasn't offended by the content.
Really. I read through way worse stuff around. And must admit I actually wrote way worse stuff than those messages.
The thing that got me disgusted is the act of PUBLISHING Tiger Wood's personal stuff. It wouldn't matter to me if it was similar to some very raunchy literature with tits and ass or even worse stuff, or if it was some very innocent love messages.
It's the right of privacy that so many people defend but couldn't careless when it comes to a public figure I'm talking about.
It'd be the same to me if the messages published were his romantic case with his lover, or a discussion with his mom about when he's visiting her (though I'm pretty shure something like that would never make the news).
I'm all for openly discussing taboos... probably even more than the average guy. But privacy is one thing I'll always defend.
Like, I'd have no problem at all if the guy decided himself to publish the messages to the press, on a book or whatever... in fact, I doubt I would even read the whole thing and post a comment about it since celebrity stuff never really catches my interest.
What caught my eye though, is the fact that someone dug the info and felt it was alright to publish it. Something that, if happened to me, would result in lawsuits and everything in my power to prevent from happening to others. Reply
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: yeah i agree ;/ i was originally draw to giz to fulfill my technophilia and trusts it to fill my head with gadget info goodness.. but with the later porn articles and unrelatedness, the image of giz as a professional go-to place for gadget/technological goodness is crumbling
Reply
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: Here's the thing with blogs. All content is given the same play.
With newspapers, you see different content in different areas. Opinion is contained to columns, rumors are usually confined to one page, business news is in a strict area, etc., etc.
There are no such dividers in blog setups. Gossip gets the same play as breaking news gets the same play as analysis.
So since there are no sections to put things into, and everything you post will at some point be at the top of the page, do you not post something that's tabloid level? Or do you post it and let it be at the top, until other posts drive it down into oblivion?
At the moment, it's still anything goes in the blog world, for better or worse.
I'm waiting to see how everything shakes out. Reply
With newspapers, you see different content in different areas. Opinion is contained to columns, rumors are usually confined to one page, business news is in a strict area, etc., etc.
There are no such dividers in blog setups. Gossip gets the same play as breaking news gets the same play as analysis.
So since there are no sections to put things into, and everything you post will at some point be at the top of the page, do you not post something that's tabloid level? Or do you post it and let it be at the top, until other posts drive it down into oblivion?
At the moment, it's still anything goes in the blog world, for better or worse.
I'm waiting to see how everything shakes out. Reply
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: Why? This shows that your data on the com is stored. And used for more than an example on the internets!
Reply
@Sticks Calhoun: That's the problem with the webz: Leave the door open and someone is liable to wander over from Gawker and start making jokes about Tiger's putter.
Reply