Gawker editorial staff posted the following statement:
Our union drive has expressed at every stage of the process that one of our core goals is to protect the editorial independence of Gawker Media sites from the influence of business-side concerns. Today’s unprecedented breach of the firewall, in which business executives deleted an editorial post over the objections of the entire executive editorial staff, demonstrated exactly why we seek greater protection. Our opinions on the post are not unanimous but we are united in objecting to editorial decisions being made by a majority of non-editorial managers. Disagreements about editorial judgment are matters to be resolved by editorial employees. We condemn the takedown in the strongest possible terms.
In the comments, Deadspin editor Timothy Burke elaborated.
“A large percentage of the Gawker Media editorial staff disagreed with Gawker’s decision to publish the post to which this statement refers,” wrote Burke. “Our opposition to the removal of the post lies solely in the process by which that decision was made, not in regard to the content of the post itself.”
We understand that position, but the problem is that obviously someone needed to step in and fix this. It just happened to be people from the business side of Gawker.
A cynic would say that the business side realized that if they didn’t delete the post, advertisers might start jumping ship. But whatever the reason, if ever there was a time to remove a post, this was it. It’s just too bad Gawker writers continue to argue about it, and downright depressing that the post was published in the first place.
On a side note: We are setting the over/under on number of days until Gawker is sued by the married man is outed at 17.