Interesting. There's an element to this story that I believe is missing (unless I missed it). Gawker now pays its writers by the number of views their posts receive. The more fiery and controversial a post, the more people read it, the more the writer gets paid.
From The New York Times: “You get focused on being sensational and even more brain candyish than Gawker was to start with,” said former Gawker editor Emily Gould of the pay structure.
This is no defense of Edelman, more a defense of good journalism. Nolan's reason for writing something outrageous is perhaps the same as Edelman's reason for allegedly instructing someone to lie--money.
Here is the Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/
0...ref=todayspaper
This’ll be one of those corny comments that will make you and your readers roll eyes – but as I process all this stuff about Edelman, and all the stuff written over the last few years (Wal-Mart and Vista/Microsoft laptop fiascos) – I think Edelman is in need of a good PR firm.
Disengagement: I recently trashed an arm of Edelman in my blog. From stats I could see that they were all over it. But being a “D” lister they ignored me completely. No call from Richard. (My tongue was in my cheek as I wrote that.) Of course, there was no need to ‘engage’ me – because my blog isn’t high-profile.
I’m in advertising – and I often tell clients that they need PR. I’m a big fan of professional, transparent PR. There is an art and a craft required when talking to the public. It’s much better for clients and the public if someone knows how to explain things.
That said – even you haven’t convinced me (yet) that Edelman is an ethical PR firm. They give me the heebie-jeebies.
Commenting by HaloScan
