It was amusing to watch this particular exchange from (mostly) the sidelines. Some of the other bits in here definitely poke at the part of my brain also still devoted to the chaotic memories of GMG.
In defense of the GMG ad team, I don't think it's fair to say that the vast majority of people who worked there thought that the ideal Gawker was one "that only posted brand-friendly stories, and if that could not be accomplished, then simply a version that never posted at all."
First, there were so many eras of GMG sales and various leaders and some were more sympathetic and some were less. Second, while the structure of sales compensation is sort of necessarily predicated on a kind of selfishness, I think to hack it at GMG at all as a sales person you had to accept something that could be worth tens of thousands of dollars to you personally could get blown up in a second over a joke.
Honestly, many more of the various sales people and staff who were there were PROUD of that. They were proud of the work that was done and they were excited to represent a brand that seemed fearless and cool. Again, this isn't everyone, and there were definitely some who just saw "fearless and cool" as a sales opening for the purpose of getting HBO, or whatever, to buy ad slots. The majority? No. "Ad sales" as we referred to it was an often vast department full of people who had various jobs (designers, copywriters, traffickers). While benign LIfehacker posts paid the bills and helped rake in the bonuses, they talked about, and loved, and shared just as many (or more!) Gawker/Jezebel/Deadspin posts.
Anyway, only in early Blog internet did it seem like a good idea to run a site like Gawker against direct advertising. That should have been a membership model.
I have an empty can of Mecca Cola in my basement because I bought it off the internet in 2006 (how? I don't remember, maybe a message board) because I wrote about Mecca Cola in 2007 for a now defunct website and I will die before I get rid of it. Also, this is a very good newsletter.
"To the extent that I have any regrets about this lengthy story it’s that I went for “Usama,” which simply doesn’t hit the way Himmler and Goering do. Surely if I had thought more I could’ve come up with a funnier name, and one more clearly on the Nazi theme."
For philosophy nerd appeal, 'Share a Coke With Heidegger' would work. For really dark commentary on brands, 'Share a Coke With Goebbels' would've been best. If you were just going gut-punch pitch black, 'Share a Coke With Dr. Mengele' would be the one. A profoundly rude comment on corporate pretend-hippyism and maybe No Labels would be 'Share a Coke With Ribbentrop'. The best one one would have to be 'Share a Coke With Molotov' and then you pour it out and put gasoline in it.
Max, when we were kids my 7 year old sister decided to try drinking a coke she found in my grandparent's bar -- we had no idea of how long it had been there, but it was likely years. The HFCS had congealed into little gummy worm like structures stuck to the bottom of the bottle. I still shudder when I think about it, so to make a long story short(er) I'll just say DON'T DRINK THE COKE.
The lesson here is your wife is a saint. -Sent from your wife
It was amusing to watch this particular exchange from (mostly) the sidelines. Some of the other bits in here definitely poke at the part of my brain also still devoted to the chaotic memories of GMG.
In defense of the GMG ad team, I don't think it's fair to say that the vast majority of people who worked there thought that the ideal Gawker was one "that only posted brand-friendly stories, and if that could not be accomplished, then simply a version that never posted at all."
First, there were so many eras of GMG sales and various leaders and some were more sympathetic and some were less. Second, while the structure of sales compensation is sort of necessarily predicated on a kind of selfishness, I think to hack it at GMG at all as a sales person you had to accept something that could be worth tens of thousands of dollars to you personally could get blown up in a second over a joke.
Honestly, many more of the various sales people and staff who were there were PROUD of that. They were proud of the work that was done and they were excited to represent a brand that seemed fearless and cool. Again, this isn't everyone, and there were definitely some who just saw "fearless and cool" as a sales opening for the purpose of getting HBO, or whatever, to buy ad slots. The majority? No. "Ad sales" as we referred to it was an often vast department full of people who had various jobs (designers, copywriters, traffickers). While benign LIfehacker posts paid the bills and helped rake in the bonuses, they talked about, and loved, and shared just as many (or more!) Gawker/Jezebel/Deadspin posts.
Anyway, only in early Blog internet did it seem like a good idea to run a site like Gawker against direct advertising. That should have been a membership model.
I have an empty can of Mecca Cola in my basement because I bought it off the internet in 2006 (how? I don't remember, maybe a message board) because I wrote about Mecca Cola in 2007 for a now defunct website and I will die before I get rid of it. Also, this is a very good newsletter.
Ur insane lol
"To the extent that I have any regrets about this lengthy story it’s that I went for “Usama,” which simply doesn’t hit the way Himmler and Goering do. Surely if I had thought more I could’ve come up with a funnier name, and one more clearly on the Nazi theme."
For philosophy nerd appeal, 'Share a Coke With Heidegger' would work. For really dark commentary on brands, 'Share a Coke With Goebbels' would've been best. If you were just going gut-punch pitch black, 'Share a Coke With Dr. Mengele' would be the one. A profoundly rude comment on corporate pretend-hippyism and maybe No Labels would be 'Share a Coke With Ribbentrop'. The best one one would have to be 'Share a Coke With Molotov' and then you pour it out and put gasoline in it.
elm
'this country, man, i tell ya' but it's germany
Max, when we were kids my 7 year old sister decided to try drinking a coke she found in my grandparent's bar -- we had no idea of how long it had been there, but it was likely years. The HFCS had congealed into little gummy worm like structures stuck to the bottom of the bottle. I still shudder when I think about it, so to make a long story short(er) I'll just say DON'T DRINK THE COKE.
It's never a bad thing to be reminded that brands are not our friends.
This type of post is exactly what I subscribe for.
Flow your words into my veins. Max you are such an amazing writer. Thank you.
"My sense, in retrospect, was that every post we did pissed off Gawker's ad-sales department ..."
But of course:
"Market reasoning is deeply, essentially smarmy."
(Tom Scocca, "On smarm", https://www.gawker.com/on-smarm-1476594977)
That Gawker was ad-supported was part of its hilariousness, at least if one didn't work there.
Replace Usama with “George” and you would have been good to go.
Put the empties in somebody else’s recycling. Maybe that guy who plays ACDC sat 3AM.