Bullies Are Never The Adults In The Room: The Fall of Deadspin

Deadspin Logo

Recently, a “private equity firm” (read: rich guys with money) bought most of the Gizmodo Media Group. That company includes several sites which aren’t hugely read, and several that are — such as The Onion, Jezebel, The Root, and Deadspin.

I assume everyone knows what The Onion is. Jezebel is a feminist website. The Root is an online magazine co-founded by Henry Louis Gates Jr, which focuses on African-American politics and culture. (It’s often surprisingly funny, even when dealing with instances of dumb racism that infuriate the writers.) Deadspin is about sports, so I’ve cited it often in my baseball-related writing.

History of Deadspin

The thing about Deadspin is that it was founded primarily for writers to make snarky remarks criticizing the fawning coverage of successful teams and athletes often featured on ESPN.

Over the years, it maintained the snarky tone but branched out to include skeezy team owners and politicians (and even annoying holiday catalogs) among its targets. The great Neil deMause, our nation’s top writer on terrible taxpayer-funded stadium deals, often wrote there.

Drew Magary, a former commenter on the site, eventually became an editor. He made the absolutely true observation that when readers say “just stick to sports” they don’t really mean it. What they mean is “don’t cover sports with” things some readers don’t want to know about, such as players who make statements against racism or war or shabby college athletic pay. (They’re fine with F-15s flying over the Super Bowl, and stories of players who saved kittens.)

Deadspin would cover “edgy” political sports stories, usually with a left-of-center attitude, and made quite a bit of money doing so.

The Beginning of the End

Enter the new owners — a group of old men who’d run almost every publication they’d ever been in charge of into the ground. (Well, except Forbes. Rich people will always like their Forbes.)

They started off by hiring their buddies, ignoring internal candidates, and several female staff complained about a particularly rude, dismissive tone. The first thing they did was tell all the writers they were expected to generate Moar Page Views[1], which is the besetting nightmare of anyone who puts thought and energy into their writing (yes, even jokes about sports take thought and energy).

Then they made it clear that this political nonsense was going to stop. Deadspin was going to be a series of click-through articles with virtually no content to distract readers beyond increasingly loud, pushy ads. The staff, naturally, fought back on this, arguing that the site was successful precisely because it drew an audience bored by what most dumb sports sites were churning out.

That’s when heads began to roll. First, Megan Greenwell, the editor-in-chief, left. Next, the deputy editor was fired, after refusing to “stick to sports.” One day later, in a truly brilliant move, the senior writers all posted non-sports, fully political articles each tagged “stick to sports” — then quit. Drew Magary quit the following day (the site’s masthead still features a direct link to his archived articles).

What you’re left with as a company might very well remain profitable, but it’s no longer any place anybody wants to work.

Jerk Boss Behavior

Similar complaints about editorial interference and overbearing new management prickiness have been made by editorial and writing staff at all of Gizmodo Media’s other websites, although none with an exodus so large as Deadspin‘s. Some former writers have noted, correctly, that this is exactly normal when private equity firms take over, well, anything (be it a successful website or struggling retail company).

But the most fascinating observation came from Deadspin‘s first high-profile escapee, aforementioned editor-in-chief Megan Greenwell, in her essay called “The Adults In The Room”:

The beginning of the end of my time here came when Spanfeller, my boss’s boss, threw a tantrum in an email to the entire company over a story our staff was reporting on his hiring practices, management style, and threats to editorial independence. He accused us of biased journalism based on the fact that we had sent an early draft to our media lawyer, which is standard journalistic practice. He accused me and a 26-year-old reporter who works for me — a wildly talented reporter who has as much integrity as anyone I’ve ever worked with — of trying to “shame and discredit others in our community” by reporting a story. When another colleague suggested in an all-staff meeting that his email was itself an attempt to publicly shame and discredit his employees, he doubled down, saying he is a transparent guy who says what he thinks…

After I submitted my resignation, explaining that the ongoing undermining from my bosses made it impossible for me to continue to succeed in my job, and that I believed I was putting my staff at risk by staying, the CEO threw a tinier tantrum. When I passed Spanfeller in the office a week after I put in notice, he let out a cruel barking laugh, as if he was disgusted to be in my presence. I said “you can speak to me, you know,” and he responded in a tone familiar to anyone who was ever bullied in middle school. “I don’t want to,” he sneered.

Greenwell’s point, of course, was that this sort of management style is common among those who consider themselves to be the hard-nosed realists, the grownups, the adults in the room. And that as a result, it drives talented people away. What you’re left with as a company might very well remain profitable, but it’s no longer any place anybody wants to work. (Sociopathic environments like Enron and the Trump White House have shown a spectacular propensity to ruin all they touch.)

That office interaction she describes also reminds me of a line from the show Deadwood: “Can’t shut up. Every bully I’ve ever met can’t shut his fuckin’ mouth.”[2]

Why Can’t Bullies Ever Shut Up?

The bully, by definition, always has to have the last word. Because anything else means admitting, or at least allowing others to believe, that you realize your behavior was wrong.

Now, are bullies the only ones who do this? Heavens, no. We’ve all done it in arguments with romantic partners, family members, online commenters, insurance company phone reps, whatever, when we felt we were in the right. Most of us, though, will eventually realize we’ve taken an argument too far and agree to disagree, retire to separate corners, drop the argument altogether — apologize if we really feel crummy about the whole thing.

A true bully will always have the last word. Even if they apologized before, they’ll nurture and nourish their interior anger at having had to do so, and take the first opportunity to resume the argument (if not with the individual in question, then anyone who seems an appropriate abuse double).

A true bully never really regrets behaving the way they do; they consider it their right as the more powerful person.

Most of the writers who quit are enormously talented and probably will have no difficulties finding new employment.

Why Are Many People In Power Some Degree Of Bully?

Orwell once stated that every bully is also a coward. I’m sure there is some truth to this. Any child services professional knows that bullies are often children who come from abusive homes. So do behavioral psychologists who study serial killers. That sort of bully might have a twisted manifestation of the impostor syndrome, where someone who has power over others constantly fears being found out as a fraud.

Some bullies, however, show no signs of ever having been mistreated in their lives. And that’s the kind I think those new Gizmodo Media owners are. They don’t fear being exposed for the frauds, or jerks, that they are. In fact, they assume such a thing will never happen. Not to them.

Power corrupts, as the saying goes, and if that’s not innate to human behavior it is certainly innate to our current form of capitalism. Everyone under capitalism is ranked by their status, in ways both big (investment portfolio size) and small (an office worker at an ad firm is considered “cooler” than a garbage hauler who makes more money).

A great many people who demean others because they have a higher status under capitalism are Orwellian coward-bullies; they’ll be rank suck-ups to those above them and full-on buttholes to anyone beneath. (As another saying goes, “shit rolls downhill.”)

Not the ones at our very top, though. Not the ones who know that no decision they make will ever harm their lives in any serious way. The super-rich almost never become poor — and only go to jail when they present a problem to the other super-rich. Since they have no need to fear any repercussions for their actions, why not be a rude jerk “who says what he thinks,” if you like? If it makes you feel really, really badass.

The Ultimate Fate Of Deadspin

Most of the writers who quit are enormously talented and probably will have no difficulties finding new employment. Craig Calcaterra at NBC Sports’s Hardball Talk does something very similar with his sportswriting. There’s lots of places a clever writer can go if they don’t want to write sports on the internet anymore. (One does need a solid resume for this, however.)

Could the site itself come back in some sort of different form? Ari Paul at Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) thinks there may be, if writers band together to form some kind of employee-owned website. Paul admits such a venture would require considerable risk with very little early reward, yet suggests that “for independent media to survive… we’re at a breaking point, so it’s necessary.”

How about the site itself? No doubt it will continue in some sort of fashion, as it currently does, but I suspect it will never draw such a loyal following again. Especially not if the new owners continue amping up intrusive ad placements. Fans of witty sports/politics coverage can find other places to go, especially on podcasts and the like.

My guess is Deadspin‘s most consistent readers — you know, the ones advertisers like best — will drift away if they already haven’t fled in disgust. (God help these new owners if they push The Root‘s staff into mass escapage.)

Will it hurt the private equity investors at all? They might make less profit than they expected, but they’ll be fine. Even if they do take a loss, they’ll certainly blame someone besides themselves. Not every spoiled brat grows up to be a bully, but every rich bully is a spoiled brat.


[1] “Moar” is apparently who high young-people spell “more” online. Who am I to stand in the way? -FM

[2] The full quote is, “Can’t shut up! Every bully I ever met can’t shut his fuckin’ mouth. Except when he’s afraid.” It is said by Seth Bullock to George Heart in the final film.

Deadspin Logo by Deadspin – Univision, Public Domain.

Campaign Website 404 Pages: Democratic 2020 Primary

It’s that time of year to look at the Democratic primary candidates’ 404 pages on their campaign websites.

As you probably know, in HTTP-speak, a 404 page is what displays when a page is not found. In the old days, you usually got a standard The page cannot be found page. Today, you are more likely to get a page that goes along with the look of the site but is otherwise nothing special, like our 404 page. But a lot of sites do more. And that has been the case with campaign websites.

So I thought we would go through each of the candidates in their order in national polling — more or less.

Joe Biden

Joe Biden’s page is designed to appeal to people like me. It has him with an ice cream cone looking very much like his character at The Onion. He says, “Looks like that page isn’t here. Keep cool – I’ll get us back on the rails.” This is shockingly good coming from a campaign that is anything but cool.

Joe Biden 404

Rating: 5

Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren has a fairly standard page but with a 2017 SNL skit with Kate McKinnon as Warren. It’s interesting that the character can be so exaggerated and yet pretty much dead-on. And clearly, I am not the only one who likes that feisty character.

Elizabeth Warren 404

Rating: 4

Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders says, “We’ve run into a yuuuuuuge problem.” It then uses this to talk about the problems of the country. There is also an animated GIF of Sanders that does kind of sum up his campaign and his appeal. A little knowing, self-deprecating humor goes a long way.

Bernie Sanders 404

Rating: 4

Pete Buttigieg

Pete Buttigieg says, “Oops! Something has gone wrong.” There’s also an image of him looking playfully troubled. For a young guy, Buttigieg is surprisingly good at banality. Extra point taken off for being money-grubbing.

Pete Buttigieg 404

Rating: 3

Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris asks, “Are you lost?” It includes an animated GIF of Harris looking pretty cute as she tries to suppress a laugh. There is a goofy side of her that has been sadly missing in this campaign. It’s nice to see here.

Kamala Harris 404

Rating: 4

Andrew Yang

Andrew Yang features a boring caricature of himself along with, “Oops! Page not found.” Surprisingly, it makes Buttigieg’s page seem a lot better. But at least he doesn’t use a quarter of the page begging for money.

Andrew Yang 404

Rating: 3

Amy Klobuchar

Amy Klobuchar has a page that announces it is a 404. Then, in big letters, it says, “Uff Da!” I looked it up but it meant what I thought. It’s pretty boring but if you scroll down, there’s a video of her throwing a binder at a staffer. (I’m Kidding!)

Amy Klobuchar 404

Rating: 3

Cory Booker

Cory Booker looks like he’s teasing a fussy baby. It’s cute. And the page says, “Cory believes we can all get where we’re going together. Just not on this page.” I like it.

Note that I didn’t dock the page for pushing fundraising because (1) it doesn’t take up much of the pages and (2) I’m more forgiving of struggling candidates.

Cory Booker 404

Rating: 4

Julian Castro

Julian Castro offers us, “Page not found.” Yeah, it’s competent. But it’s no better than the Frankly Curious 404 page, which took all of 10 seconds to install via a WordPress plugin. Really, Castro brothers: raise your game!

Julian Castro

Rating: 2

Tulsi Gabbard

Tulsi Gabbard’s page is aggressively plain. I guess if you aren’t going to do anything interesting for your 404 page you might as well make it uncluttered. It certainly is more compelling than Castro’s.

Tulsi Gabbard 404

Rating: 3

Tom Styer

Tom Styer tells us, “Not found.” But you can watch a 4-minute video about how awesome he is. Now I’m thinking I was too harsh with Castro. Wow!

Tom Styer 404

Rating: 2

Steve Bullock

Steve Bullock says “Looks like the page you were looking for has gone fishing!” And there’s a picture with him with a fish. I know I’ve seen candidates in previous years use this. It’s not horrible. But: fish torture?

Steve Bullock 404

Rating: 2

Kirsten Gillibrand

Kirsten Gillibrand is shown drinking a pint of beer. It says, “We all have those days.” It’s nice and simple — appropriate for her (ended) campaign.

Kirsten Gillibrand 404

Rating: 4

John Delaney

John Delaney displays a B&W picture of someone driving with the words (from Born to Run), “We’re gonna get to that place / Where we really wanna go…” It doesn’t look very good but it’s probably the most useful 404 of the bunch. Still: it is officially no longer cool to quote Springsteen.

John Delaney 404

Rating: 3

Marianne Williamson

Marianne Williamson has an incredibly simple but pleasant page, “Let’s get back on track.”

Marianne Williamson 404

Rating: 3

Michael Bennet

Like Bullock, Michael Bennet uses a page I’ve seen before. There is a (poor-quality) picture of his family (I assume) in the woods having just cut down a Christmas tree. It says, “Looks like you’re lost in the woods.” I wonder if what they did is legal.

Michael Bennet 404

Rating: 2

Wayne Messam

Wayne Messam tells us, “Page not found!” And there’s a nice but unrelated picture of him.

Wayne Messam 404

Rating: 3

Summary

None of these pages are embarrassing. And a number of them are pretty good. But there is no doubt that Joe Biden’s page does the best job of pushing his narrative. And overall, I think he has an excellent site.

Here are my rankings, but I reserve the right to change my mind (which I will undoubtedly do).

  • Joe Biden (5)
  • Elizabeth Warren (4)
  • Kirsten Gillibrand (4)
  • Bernie Sanders (4)
  • Kamala Harris (4)
  • Cory Booker (4)
  • Pete Buttigieg (3)
  • Amy Klobuchar (3)
  • Marianne Williamso (3)
  • Tulsi Gabbard (3)
  • Andrew Yang (3)
  • Wayne Messam (3)
  • John Delaney (3)
  • Tom Styer (2)
  • Julian Casto (2)
  • Steve Bullock (2)
  • Michael Bennet (2)

Let me know what you all think. Am I missing something? Is John Delaney’s page cool in a way I can’t see? Am I being too hard on Bullock and Bennet for ripping off past candidates? Am I being too soft on Elizabeth Warren because I have a crush on Kate McKinnon and, well, Elizabeth Warren? Let me know in the comments. Or not. Regardless what you say I know that I am absolutely right about everything.

Disingenuous Headlines From Fox News

I check Google News a few times a day just to keep up with what’s going on. And so I see a lot of headlines from Fox News. In fact, it is interesting to see what things they don’t publish about. For example, when Trump pulled out of northern Syria and abandoned the Kurds, it was notable that there was almost no coverage from Fox News. If they can’t spin a story in a way that makes the Republicans look good, they don’t publish stories about it.

The Formula

But I want to highlight a different aspect of Fox News’ deceptions. A shocking number of their headlines are just right-wing talking points pitched as actual news. The biggest way they do this is to offer headlines of the following form:

[Someone]: [Right-wing talking point]

In general, the “someone” is simply a Fox News contributor. Sometimes, this is someone you’ve heard of — at least if you follow Fox News. For example, “Hannity: Dems want to impeach Trump because they’re ‘hell-bent on taking revenge’ for 2016 defeat.”

Other news outlets use this formula, but it is almost always someone of note who is being quoted. For example, CNN recently published the headline, “Pelosi: I don’t know why GOP is afraid of the truth.” Everyone knows who Nancy Pelosi is. She is a major political figure. The story was about a speech she gave on the House floor.

Fox News Examples

But when Fox News uses this formula, their intent is to deceive not to inform. Let me offer you just a few headlines that I’ve collected over the past couple of weeks.

  • Liz Peek: Democrats toss Biden aside in zeal to impeach – ensuring Trump’s reelection
  • Tom Del Beccaro: Decoding Democrats’ rush to impeachment
  • Gregg Jarrett: Trump did NOT commit an impeachable offense on call with Ukraine’s president – Here’s why
  • Kayleigh McEnany dismisses ‘quid-pro-Joe’ Biden’s call for Trump’s impeachment
  • David Bossie: Impeachment inquiry? No, Americans are witnessing an impeachment conclusion
  • Justin Haskins: Elizabeth Warren is pretending to be something she’s not — let’s not fall for her masquerade
  • Liz Peek: Sorry, Democrats, impeachment doesn’t mean you’ll carry the White House in 2020
  • David Bossie: Trump impeachment vote is Democratic declaration of war – Republicans must declare war on Dems
  • Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders want to wreck the ‘great American experiment,’ Jesse Watters says
  • Stirewalt: Warren’s $52T ‘Medicare-for-all’ plan is a ‘disaster’ just like her DNA test release.

Pretending to Be Objective

Notice what’s really going on here. Fox News wants to publish a story saying, “Trump impeachment vote is Democratic declaration of war.” But that’s not what a news organization does.

So they publish, “David Bossie: Trump impeachment vote is Democratic declaration of war – Republicans must declare war on Dems.” That why they are publishing news. You see, they aren’t saying this. They are just offering “expert” opinion.

One could say that this is just how Fox News presents its opinion coverage. And that’s true. But why is it that the big news outlets that constantly find their way at the top of Google News are overwhelmingly, you know, news?

Opinion All the Time

For example, here are the headlines from three days ago when the House was about to hold a vote on the impeachment inquiry:

  1. What can we expect from televised impeachment hearing? (The New Yorker)
  2. Why John Bolton and his ex-colleagues are crucial witnesses (The Washington Post)
  3. Rep Andy Biggs: Trump-hating Democrats do whatever it takes to impeach, ignoring precedents (Fox News)

Obviously, Fox News is pushing what sells. The first headline would bore their viewers. The second would make them feel bad. But the third? That tells them exactly what they want to hear.

More Examples

Another good example is the treatment of Elizabeth Warren’s Medicare-for-All plan. Fox News cannot discuss it without highlighting it’s cost, as if they were adding “Be afraid! Be very afraid!” to the end of their headlines.

I highlighted one above. Here is the headline of their first article, “Cavuto breaks down Warren’s $52 trillion Medicare for All plan.” At the same time, not one of the half-dozen headlines from actual news outlets mentioned its cost. But then, those outlets produce information, not propaganda.

On those few occasions where Fox News must publish something that will upset their viewers, they do it in a way as to minimize the discomfort. Here’s an example, ” Graham urges Trump to act on Syria, rips Pelosi’s impeachment push.” One Republican has a minor disagreement with another but it’s okay because he “rips” the enemy.

Fox News Is Not a News Organization

What’s maddening about this is that Fox News is treated like a regular news organization. In as much as they produce regular news, it is only so that they can claim the same stature as The New York Times and Newsweek. What they really are is the television equivalent of a tabloid.


Fox News by Johnny Silvercloud. Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.