The pattern never changes: in the wake of a jihad terror attack or plot, Muslims in the West do not do what they should do: redouble their efforts against jihadis in their own communities, and their cooperation with law enforcement officials. Instead, they claim that they are already cooperating, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and complain that they are being victimized by a “backlash” and try to seize the spotlight as victims. The mainstream media, of course, is all too willing to oblige. Four separate studies since 1998 have shown that 80% of the mosques in the U.S. teach hatred of Jews and Christians and the superiority of Sharia over Constitutional law, and the percentage is likely to be similar in Canada, but no one seems concerned. To be concerned would be “Islamophobic.” Meanwhile, this claim of victimhood is designed to deflect attention away from the jihad murders themselves, and intimidate people into thinking that it would be wrong to pile on to these poor victimized people and demand that they do more to stop the preaching of the Islamic doctrines that incite people to acts of hatred and violence.
more fun with Gawker.
Who in their right mind would want to risk a brands billion dollar reputation on a publishing house that cheered the Glenn Beck ad boycott, but then talks shit about any brand wants to distance themselves from them? Gawker made their name on the Gawker Stalker, Gawker hoped to bankrupt Chick Fil A over charitable donations. Gawker celebrated when Firefox Chief Brendan Eich was ousted because he too had made donation Gawker did not approve of. Boycotts like this are the results of politicising everything, and now it’s finally come full circle. There’s a reason newspapers had a strict line drawn between editorial and advertising departments, one that now not only has been blurred by native advertising but also the birth of “ad studios” and “featured partner” at the likes of clickbait publications such as Gawker and Buzzfeed, who have spent more energy courting ad agencies than they did chasing down twitter-conversations to report on. Don’t say we didn’t try to warn you.
So while I might have thought “back away slowly” was a good idea a couple of months ago, I now believe your brand has to strike first. Stay on top of this story and see where you are listed as an advertising partner. If your brand is not partnering with said site, have them remove your logo immediately, I’m sure legal can help you write up a decent letter on that. Seek out the next targets before you get dragged into this. Is your brand representing family values & healthy children? Then maybe a site discussing a progressive stance on pedophiles and describing the abuse of a seven year old girl as a “sexual relationship” isn’t a place where your brand wants to be seen?
Read more at http://adland.tv/adnews/gawker-toxic-brands-who-partner-them/1291467968#SbaUFfFbR5rpBczi.99
There was a time when Gawker Media didn’t have to worry about losing advertising from brands such as Adobe over its shameful promotion of bullying (the biggest problem affecting children in the West today). The following is a re-post of an article I published here in 2012. Gawker Media had recently sold ‘Fleshbot.com’- one of the sites in its blog network and the pornographic sister to Jezebel and Gawker. Apparently, it was sold not because it was a profit loss (as a porn site, it was probably making more money than all the other Gawker Media sites combined), but because it sat uncomfortably with the ‘liberal progressive’ feminist ideals that the company promotes. Someone sooner or later was going to point out the sickening double standards. Especially when Fleshbot’s primary source of income appeared to be from running an adult ad network that tempted liberal progressive male feminist readers in with the promise of pornographic images and videos ‘hacked’ from the social network accounts of teenage girls or uploaded by vengeful ex-boyfriends – with some of the girls appearing to be as young as 13.
Gawker Media is being sued for $100 million by Hulk Hogan for publishing a clip of a leaked sex tape featuring himself.
This is the company that owns both Gawker and Jezebel websites, and which led a crusade against two controversial sexually voyeuristic subreddits – namely r/jailbaits and r/creepshots. Gawker journalist Adrian Chen was the cheerleader for both campaigns, and recently ‘exposed’ the anonymous redditor behind both of those subreddits. He has repeatedly expressed his desire for r/mensrights to be the next on his target list.
It’s probably too much to expect that Adrian will resign over the double standards involved in the gross invasion of Hulk Hogan’s sexual privacy. After all, presumably in his White Knight world an unidentified young woman has the right to parade around in semi-naked clothing without being voyeuristically objectified, whereas a male celebrity can have his genitals and private sex life splashed all over the very website the he works for in order for profits to climb and his wages to be paid. No problem.
However, I don’t know if they’ll be any money left in the piggy bank to pay Adrian’s wages if Gawker has to shell out $100 million to Hogan.
One presumes that Gawker Media were already financially struggling since they were pressured into offloading another of their blog websites – Fleshbot.com – this year. The adult site was likely the only one in their network that made a substantial profit, but the company apparently decided that housing a hardcore porn site alongside the most popular feminist website online, as well as the morally crusading ‘liberal’ Gawker Magazine, smacked too much of double standards and rank hypocrisy.
Especially when that adult blog made most of its money out of advertising a porn paysite network that includes at least one highly dubious website purporting to offer to subscribing members sexual photos and videos of teenage girls – some of whom appear to be underage- illegally hacked from their social networks.
more at http://theantifeminist.com/when-gawker-staff-wages-paid-revenge-child-porn/