Two Gawker editors resign out of… ‘principle’? More like stupidity.

Tommy Craggs, the executive editor of Gawker Media, and Max Read, the editor-in-chief of Gawker.com, have announced their resignation from the company in the wake of consumer backlash following the publishing of a highly controversial article essentially outing the CFO of Condé Nast.

The formal announcement was made today on Gawker.com, along with official memo's from both which I refuse to link to or quote out of the pure absurdity of the two claiming victim to the situation. In the post announcing their resignation, Gawker writer J.K. Trotter wrote:

"In letters sent today, Craggs and Read informed staff members that the managing partnership’s vote to remove a controversial post about the CFO of Condé Nast—a unprecedented act endorsed by zero editorial employees—represented an indefensible breach of the notoriously strong firewall between Gawker’s business interests and the independence of its editorial staff. Under those conditions, Craggs and Read wrote, they could not possibly guarantee Gawker’s editorial integrity."

I find it both pathetic and hilarious that even now, as their flame of relevance dwindles, the two refuse to accept blame for an article meant as nothing more than a hit piece. To attempt to claim that a breech of principles is responsible for their resignation and not the moronic decision to publish such an awful article is baffling to me. Own up to your mistake and maybe people will forgive you for ruining this man's life.

In conclusion, good riddance Tommy Craggs and Max Read. The internet and the world of journalism (not that Gawker is known for its journalistic integrity) will be a much better place without you. And for the remainder of the Gawker editorial staff who still think the article should've remained up, I kindly ask that you also follow suit.