Nick Denton: 'Flat Is The New Up? We Should Be So Lucky'

Gawker Media head Nick Denton has a lot to say about this recession we're in, and much of it is worrisome.


A concise, backed-up take on what Denton thinks is going to happen to Online Media in coming quarters:

To judge from a hysterical press, one might think the apocalypse was already upon the media industry: rolling cuts this month at Time Inc., the hallowed magazine group; a new catchphrase among advertising pundits, flat is the new up; and revisions even of the internet advertising that was supposed to be the salvation of the media industry. J.P. Morgan's Imran Kahn just slashed projected growth next year of US online display advertising from 16% to 6%.

We should be so lucky. These supposedly brutal layoffs at Time and other titles amount to only 6% of headcount at the bloated Time Warner magazine group. Other media groups such as the New York Times and Conde Nast—a hiring freeze, how callous!—are being even more squeamish. From conglomerates to internet ventures, executives should be planning now on a decline of up to 40% in advertising spending during this cycle. Instead they're sleepwalking into economic extinction—even those lean online ventures which were supposed to take up the mantle and preserve New York's position as a media capital.

His Machiavellian take to online publishers? Plan for the worst - now. How? Six ways:

1. Get out of ad-averse topics like politics
2. Renegotiate vendor contracts
3. Consolidate titles
4. Offshore more
5. Variable compensation
6. Offer more value for marketers
   

I don't agree with everything here, but Denton makes a good greater point: changes must happen soon, and they must be educated.

Read the post: Doom-mongering: A 2009 Internet media plan

BREAKING: Valleywag, Consumerist lose editors

Originally posted at ZDNet.com's The Toybox.

A source close to Gawker Media informed me a moment ago that popular sites Consumerist, Valleywag and (NSFW) Fleshbot will may be shuttered will lose most of their editorial talent.

"Nineteen jobs will be cut," my source says, with a formal announcement from Gawker Media coming later this afternoon. (UPDATE: Valleywag has already posted notice. Managing Editor Owen Thomas has laid off associate editors Nicholas Carlson and Jackson West and reporter Melissa Gira Grant.)

An internal e-mail circulated through the Gawker pipeline just 30 minutes ago:

I have some bad news. Here's the heart of it: we are cutting 19 of our 133 editorial positions and suspending bonus payments at the start of next year. With the savings, we are increasing base pay and hiring 10 new people on the most commercially successful Gawker sites. But I know that's scant consolation for the colleagues we're losing and for those of you who have been enjoying the bonus windfalls from breakout stories.

You can guess the reason for these brutal measures: the recession. Sure, the company is currently profitable and advertising sales are up by about 30% on their level of a year ago. Our biggest clients are consumer electronics and entertainment companies that are relatively well insulated. And, yes, this is not the first time I've predicted doom: in July 2006, when we "battened down the hatches" and closed down Sploid and Screenhead; and in April this year, when we spun off Idolator, Gridskipper and Wonkette.

But now the credit crisis is clearly going to affect every sector of the economy. Advertising buys typically plunge after the Christmas shopping season, and 2009 is obviously going to be exceptionally difficult. We have to prepare for the worst, now, rather than when the worst comes upon us.

We never used to talk about the business side of the operation. Traffic was the only concern; my belief was that juicy news would draw the readers and the advertising would take care of itself. We were patient; even if it took four years for a site to develop the audience that finally registered with advertisers, we had the time. No longer.

Sites such as Consumerist, whose success has been measured more in traffic and recognition than in revenue, now need to cover their costs. I can't underline enough that this harsh commercial judgment is no reflection whatsoever on the editorial teams that are being cut.

Each of these sites performs a vital function. Consumerist provides an outlet for disgruntled consumers that exists nowhere else on the web; Valleywag has given puffed-up Silicon Valley the prick it's long needed; and Fleshbot manages to be classy and filthy at the same time. The site leads and writers on all of our sites have done exactly what we asked them to: work harder than the competition and grow the audience. It's my commercial judgment that's been at fault.

One reason we're eliminating these positions is to reinforce the teams on the sites with the most commercial appeal—Gizmodo, Kotaku, Lifehacker and Gawker—and the properties such as Jezebel, io9, Deadspin and Jalopnik which are poised to join them.

One new recruit we're confirming today is Gabriel Snyder from W Magazine in Los Angeles who, as managing editor of Gawker.com, will continue the site's evolution into a national news and entertainment site. We are also hiring new contributors at Jezebel, Deadspin, Kotaku and io9.

Even in the growing editorial teams we need to control costs. And that means a new look at traffic bonuses. We've been spending $50,000 a month on average on pageview bonuses. The scheme has made writers hustle for traffic even in teams so large that there was a risk they become lumbering. It's helped us hit a record 274m pageviews last month, up 69% on last September.

Pageview bonuses will continue this quarter. And we are committed to pageview incentives, and to measuring performance by a writer's individual pageviews, in the long term. But a first quarter spike in traffic — and the resulting bonus payments — could be dangerous if advertising markets are troubled next year. And we're assuming that the economy is so volatile that most of you would like a little bit more predictability about your own income.

That's why we're suspending the pageview bonus for the first quarter at least, but making up for some of the loss of income by raising pay. If you haven't recently agreed to a new rate, your monthly base amount will automatically be increased by 5% in January.

The news about the job and bonus cuts will be demoralizing. The golden age of the blog is over, people will say. Gawker Media is behaving like those big media companies that we mock so easily. I could come up with some bullshit line about how much worse it would have been to wait until we were forced to control costs; or how much more unpleasant life will be at the many internet ventures and newspapers that won't make it through the downturn. I could give you my optimistic spin about the glorious future that awaits us on the far side of this downturn.

But there is no escaping the fact that we're losing some excellent colleagues and the environment next year will be bleak. The one consolation is that there will be plenty of news for us to break — starting with this email, which you are free to leak.

Radar's Choire Sicha -- previously the editor of Gawker, among other things -- is on the case, too. So's CNET's Caroline McCarthy on The Social blog.

UPDATE 2:26 PM: Word is that it's unclear whether the sites will be shuttered or merely just scaled back to a minimum workforce.

UPDATE 2:44 PM: A different source says the sites are not getting shut down but will have considerable layoffs. (Update 3:00PM: Gawker Media managing editor Noah Robischon confirmed that no sites will be closed but there will be layoffs.)

What I'm wondering is: What's [publisher Nick] Denton's thinking? He's cutting back on Valleywag but putting even more resources into the traffic-leading Gizmodo site (and Kotaku, and io9, and Jezebel). Is he simply fattening the chickens before he sends them to slaughter -- in this case, to an online suitor for sale? (Just today, Gizmodo solicited help from readers to find open gallery space in NYC. Do I smell a gadgety, co-branded, moneymaking event?)

BREAKING: Is Gawker Gaming Its Own System?

Gawker Media has never been a company to adhere to ethical standards or rules (with the exception of its liberal reader exit strategy). Now, it seems that all those readers/commenters who give Gawker its true "snark" are its very own interns [via former College Humorist jakoblodwick.com]:

me [Jakob Lodwick]: Nick.
me: pretend you're not talking to the world's slowest retard
Nick Denton: sure
me: none of them are real?
Nick Denton: no
Nick Denton: there are three or four real ones
Nick Denton: collegecallgirl is one
me: and the rest are interns.
Nick Denton: yeah
me: the commenters on gawker are employees of gawker media.
Nick Denton: not employees
Nick Denton: interns
me: pretending to be anonymous web jerks
me: you know that I'm going to post this conversation
Nick Denton: sure
me: and you don't care because...
me: ...because it doesn't matter.
Nick Denton: good night

Or as our mostly-absent columnist Mitchel Stevens summed up to me: "The 'elite gawker commenters' are all interns at Gawker. And have multiple accounts."

I've dispatched Stevens to troll the comments for the truth. If this really is the case, Gawker's falling even farther from becoming a legitimate media power.

UPDATE: Fascinating video about Denton from an old classmate. Not a lot of insight here, just well-chosen words -- including some choice examples about self promotion. See comment below.

Gawker Eds Jump Ship Without Life Preservers

Interesting news in digital journalism this week: Three editors at Gawker, the sarcasm-fueled gossip site, announced that they will be leaving the Gawker Media empire. This includes:

• Longtime managing editor and once-editor Choire Sicha;
• Gawker editor Emily Gould;
• and nightlife editor Josh Stein.

Why? Mixed reactions from the group -- some are tired of Gawker, some are tired of a 5-to-9 job and some just want to try something new.

The New York Observer reports that "Maggie Shnayerson, who started on Sept. 24, is now the longest-serving editor at Gawker." And I think that's a pretty interesting indicator as to the challenges Nick Denton and Co. face as a major employer of alternative journalists/editors/publishers/citizens.

Women's Wear Daily reported some chilling facts about an alternative media organization like Gawker: extremely limited upward mobility. Still.

"In my dreams I'm going to find a job reporting on fires," said Sicha. "But I'm a little creaky and old to do that." He added, "I just feel like, now that everyone sort of operates at the speed we do, who's actually going to do the stuff that takes some time or some reading?...Everything has become knee-jerk like we are." In other words, "There can be one TMZ, but if there are going to be eight TMZs, I want out."

Gould struck a similar note. "Whatever Gawker originally set out to do, it kind of did, and now it just feels over," she said. "I would love it if it just fell off the face of the earth....I don't want to say the meanest thing or the most shocking thing possible anymore, because it gets so old and so soul-killing. There is stuff I really care about. I'm not interested in tearing it down as much as describing it."

It's not only subject matter -- after all, the magazine business is known to be a revolving-door-type industry -- but rather there's nowhere to go. Gawker's been adding some lesser positions to it's portfolio of hired help, but for the most part, the people who leave haven't anywhere to aspire to get to. And there aren't exactly any companies quite like Gawker, either.

Why is this important, then? Because it shows that Gawker Media, despite its largesse, is still an alternative. No matter what they pay, or supposed benefits, or what have you, it remains an anomaly. When you're done with Gawker, you're probably done with the independent blog world, at least on the level of success you had at Gawker. Many editors -- say, Jessica Coen or Ana Marie Cox -- went on to MSM, Big-J employers and tried, sort of, to replicate what they were so damn good at on Gawker. But for the MSM-wary, few options remain. Gawker's still the top.

So where does Gawker fit in the grander scheme? It remains to be seen, although I would suggest that it's still a springboard for "bigger," "better," more mainstream media. But until it grows -- or a competitor does -- it's clear that Gawker alums will continue to walk through the revolving door at a rapid pace. Those that don't jump on the MSM bandwagon might just never be heard from again.

Mitchel Stevens’ Guide to Employment and Liveblogs

Editor's Note: The following column is part of an anonymous weekly humor column chronicling the struggle of a new, young journalist out in the working world. You may find the author's previous posts in the archives. --The Ed.

Hey gang. A funny thing happened on the way to the Internet today. It turns out that New York magazine ran a little feature this week on a certain lil’ snarky weblog-that-begat-all-blogs: Gawker (proper.)

Traditionally, this sort of “eye on the media” is left to The Editorialiste since this is what he goes to school for. However, we had a brief discussion and realized that this is in fact my area of expertise. You may say, “But Mitchel! How do you do media analysis, aside from poorly?”

And I say, “But reader! This revenge-feature is totally focusing on the common man affected and thus empowered by new media — eye ee, me, Mitchel Stevens. Do you see what I did there?”

And so, perhaps in homage to another great mind of our times, I have decided to liveblog my reading off New York magazine’s latest feature, “Gawker and the Rage of the Creative Underclass.”

7:00 a.m.: Wake up. Mouth tastes like gin, again. Fuck. Promised self I wouldn’t do that on a Sunday night anymore. It’s not the good gin, either, but the shitty type that comes in the same bottle as the good stuff. Fuck. Head hurts.

7:30 a.m.: Wake up again after falling back to sleep. Mouth tastes like cigarettes, gin and ass. Ugh.

8:00 a.m.: Finally get out of bed.

8:05 a.m.: Do morning online job. Open Gmail.

8:06 a.m.: Open link to New York magazine piece.

8:08 a.m.: Wait, aren’t I the “creative underclass?”

8:10 a.m.: Jesus Christ, Vanessa “GRIG” Grigoriadis is a whiny person. I once worked as a researcher for her. Like talking to an early morning stoner.

---
SAMPLE:

MS: So, what are you looking for?

VG: Ok, so I need the stuff no one else knows.

MS: Ok.

VG: Seriously, the kind of things no one checks for.

MS: Ok.

VG: Stuff on message boards, on MySpace pages. If it’s on there, I need it.

MS: Ok. So mainly the Internet stuff.

VG: Yeah.

MS: Ok, got it.

3 DAYS LATER…

VG: Why did you forward me all these MySpace pages?

MS: You wanted the MySpace stuff.

VG: I already know this. God, listen, I need stuff from the MySpace pages that people don’t know about. I need the real stuff.

MS: …like?

VG: You know, the underground.

---

Right. OK, back to liveblogging.

8:12 a.m.: This entire opening is a disclosure about how THE GRIG was burned by Gawker and had to explain to her mother-in-law what a blog was? WTF.

8:13 a.m.: Maybe she forgot about how she exploited her husband’s own weight for a story. Hm, I wonder if her mother-in-law Googled that. (Totes via Gawker).

8:15 a.m.: “Like most journalists, I tend to have a defeatist attitude about Gawker, dismissing it as the Mystery Science Theater 3000 of journalism,” in the not too distant future, about 2007 A.D., there was a shitty trend piece, about bloggers like you and me….LA LA LA.

8:20 a.m.: blah blah blah, Gawker once was written by someone else... "Sicha, a handsome ex-gallerist who spends his downtime gardening on Fire Island, is generally warm and even-tempered, but on this last point, he looks truly disgusted. ‘Not a week goes by I don’t want to quit this job,” he says, “because staring at New York this way makes me sick.’” Ooh! How daring! Next week in New York magazine, people dislike their jobs! Followed the week after by: “My Husband Isn’t Fat Anymore and DON’T YOU GOOGLE HIM!!!!!” (By Vanessa Grigoriadis).

8:21 a.m.: Make coffee.

8:34 a.m.: Page two of the online article has Emily “Hey, guise, totally edgy since I give the middle fi—LOOK AT MY BREASTS. I AM NEEDY” Gould, Choire Sicha and Julia Allison. Is it bad I mock Emily? Shit, now I really feel bad. Because she’s moody, guys. Working is hard. Fuck. I feel bad. Sorry, Emily. I mean, I don’t mean to be bitchy. Your work is tough, I know. I freelance too. And blah blah, Josh made fun of Neal Pollack’s kid. Whatever, it takes a proud iPhone clad douche to knock on a little kid. But I really feel like a prick. I know the rooftop photoshoot was probably after days of convincing by Nikola “Teh L Magazine Greatest Photog” Tamindzic. And omg, all you ever knew how to do was write! Me too! Oh, man, I think we’d totally be friends. Do you notice how THE GRIG is making you out to be the human side of OMG GAWKER because you are the soulful one, Em. You’re totes the human side.

And you know, fuck Jimmy Kimmel fo…wait.

Wait.

Hold the fuck on.

9:20 a.m.: No, wait, it’s still there. You make $55,000 a year? Seriously. You make $55,000 a year, wrote a book and are complaining that you have to work? I understand you have to pay freelancer’s taxes. I know what that is. I get receipts every time I buy a MetroCard.

But you are COMPLAINING about making that much money? What the fuck? You’re like every other punk kid I knew: oh boo hoo, life is hard—except for this shit-load amount of money I make! Oh, life is hard! I need to go have appetizers at a classy restaurant! Life is pain! I need to have a Pink Panty Dropper.

9:24 a.m.: Seriously. WTF. Why don’t you complain about your job more.

9:26 a.m.: Yeah, Denton looks like Morrissey. Speaking of, why hasn’t Gawker posted about this yet?

9:30 a.m.: I’m on page 3 of the online article. What does this article have to do with the “creative underclass?” So far, this has been about THE GRIG being pissed her mother-in-law googled her son and blames THE GRIG. Not to mention—and I skipped ahead here—that THE GRIG made friends with Emily Gould and loves Choire Sicha’s sexy underwear. Well, we all love Choire’s underwear. It’s what we see when we “apply” for work at Gawker. Whatever.

But this article? It’s a pity. This is the prime example of old media trying attack online. Especially when online outlets such as this—and especially with the reasoning that Alex Balk didn’t mean to leave for Radar magazine, but was forced to leave regarding a post me made—show that online is indeed better.

Shit, I give up on this whole “liveblogging” thing. I can’t stomach THE GRIG’s story, nor how she attempts to humanize poor Emily as the scarred, lonely little girl in a big scary man’s second life. Maybe THE GRIG forgot that most people in media make below $28 K when it comes to work. After all, how much did she make for this corporate blowjob? Maybe she cut off some cash for her tubby hubby.

It should be no surprise that Gawker has yet to comment on the article that cites some in the office are drug users or like to have sex. What a shock! At least we know one thing—Richard Blakely, one of Gawker’s videographers, doesn’t wear tight white pants. Right, Alex Goldberg?

But I digress. I tried to get in contact* with the kids at Gawker in the interest of journalism and integrity and web 2.0. Sadly, no amount of uppers, downers or gin could attract Sicha, the guy with a Serge Gainsborough tat or Lil’ Miss “I make 55 K. SO DEPRESSING. WAAAAAAAAMBULANCE.”

Sigh. Anyway, the Gawker kids haven’t even discussed the piece on their site yet. So far it was just “omg, alex pareene is here. Omg, these things are going on. Omg, we are not going to acknowledge the 500-lb pink elephant in the room. Omg, CMJ is so totally for young people!”

Oh, Gawker. You’re so adorable. Like a $55,000 worth of adorable. But not nearly as adorable as how tubby THE GRIG’s husband is.

-MS

*Note: Mitchel Stevens did not try at all to talk to the editors at Gawker. In fact, he sort of just played Bona Drag for an hour, drank some gin and then sat around refreshing his Gmail while googling himself. Mitchel Stevens really didn’t feel inspired this time. Mitchel Stevens wants breakfast.

Why 'Gawker Media' Could Become True Journalism -- And How Nick Denton Is The Next William Randolph Hearst

Gawker recently announced the launch of its 14th blog, Jezebel, which will have a focus on "women, women's media and fashion." Its managing editor will be a Star/In Style vet, its editor will be a WSJ vet and its associate editor will hail from the offices of Elle.

But that's not the news. The real story happened on the same day, and stems from Gawker Media managing editor Lockhart Steele's words upon his departure from his own position, who mentioned that the new media institution is moving away from aggregating web stories and toward breaking original stories.

Wait....huh? Gawker breaking original news? What's next, a Gawker Wire Service for syndication nationwide (or, at least, in blue states)?

I don't know if the name "Gawker" and the phrase "breaking original stories" contrast for you like they do for me, but it's worth noting that behind its expansion, Gawker Media is slowly turning into the rogue, "gay," "virgin," "eunuch" of the MSM crowd (in their own words) rather than the blog crowd. What I mean to say is, Gawker Media is slowly changing its stance from MSM "opposition" to "alternative."

Gawker has always played off the audiences of MSM. For example, the flagship blog and its West Coast sister Defamer cover the Page Six/Us Weekly/In Touch/People beat; Wonkette covers The Politico beat; Gizmodo covers the Popular Mechanics beat; Valleywag covers the Wired beat; Jalopnik covers the Motor Trend beat; Consumerist covers the Consumer Reports beat; and so on. Its new blog does the same -- only this time, it's stealing directly from women's magazines, one of the biggest audiences in the media world.

Gawker Media style has always been 50 percent wrath and 50 percent news aggregation. And while they've done a great job diversifying their portfolio (and I'm calling a men's interest blog or a business-oriented blog as the next one out the door, you heard it here first), the real news is that Gawker is moving away from that 50 percent news aggregation.

What that means is, in effect, that Gawker Media is getting closer and closer to being the journalism outlet it so vehemently denies being. And that in and of itself is fascinating. Will Gawker start paying more to its editors for original content (any Gawker editor reading this is probably thinking, "Not on your life if Denton's still in charge")? Will there be less stress on posting 20 posts a day and more stress on posting original content? Will there be Gawker people out in the field -- dare I say GM reporters?

I'm getting ahead of myself, of course. But you get the idea. Gawker Media readers already depend on the company for its signature vitriol. Will it depend on it for content, too?

Furthermore, Gawker Media sites would become more like MSM -- original content and aggregated content when needed (like the AP, but without paying for it). But this is a whole new brand of journalism, effectively digital yellow journalism: Original opinion mixed with original stories.

On this kind of path, Nick Denton would be the next William Randolph Hearst, the next Joseph Pulitzer, the next Rupert Murdoch -- a man with an army of niche publications tweaked for the popular masses.

I don't expect the shift to happen quickly. Gawker Media still has a lot on its plate. But if that's the direction the company's headed -- original content -- its editors' cries of "not journalists!" may soon ring hollow.

Mano E Mano: The Editorialiste meets "The Editorialist"

Dear Rob Anderson,

We've got to talk. This new blog, "The Editorialist"? I must admit, I'm feeling a little snuffed. I spend my time, my blood, my sweat, and hyperlinks to analyze the grassroots movement and often throw in my opinion - editorializing, so to speak - to fill a niche market and my desire to write when freelancing in New York doesn't pay the bills. But then I read on IWantMedia that you've got better ideas. In fact, your idea is so good, so original, that you're gonna launch it with The Washington Post. Without an "e."

Ouch.

All for an "e," Rob? I'm hurt. This was just Valentine's Day! Where's the saccharine love?

Sure, your blog covers op-eds, and mine covers the components of a changing industry. Sure, I write this on my own unpaid time living below the poverty line and you write this commanding health benefits and a prestigious masthead. But Rob, baby - what's a blogger to do when you hijack his name for use in mainstream media? And nary a link to me in sight!

Robby, you're pushing me ever farther into the fringe media, the netroots, the blogging jungle. And you, that lovely mainstream media, get all the credit for being "cool," "with it," "hip." And most times, I'm with you on that - sometimes you MSM people need to loosen up a little, and I like seeing you walk around with iPod nanos and podcasting and all of that. You're really getting with it; good for you. But why did you have to steal a poor blogger's thunder?

Tell me - was it your editor's idea?

After all, what if the L.A. Times started "DailyDose" or the Chicago Tribune started "Gonzette" or the Philadelphia Inquirer started "Talker" or the Wall Street Journal started "Bizmodo"? Would that be cool?

No. Not cool at all, Robert.

There are plenty of freelancers who get their ideas copped by their editors. But a blog? That's low. Surely WaPo HR has room for a young blogger - who by day is actually is a living, breathing, ethical, hard-working journalist! - who needs a regular paycheck to support his pipe dreams of, you know, life stability in an era where higher education equates with Mercedes-Benz and it takes 40 (yes, 40!) times my $2000 rent to live where I went to school...a block from the projects.

You know, instead of ganking his calling card. I'm running out of PB&J for lunch, you know.

In the face of adversity, Nick Denton would be asking for his acid martinis extra-shaken. But me? Well, let's just say that I'll be writing with a stiff upper lip.

A blogger scorned. It's on, Anderson.