Deadspin writer Barry Petchesky has been fired for not sticking to sports

"dogisbadob" (dogisbadob) 10/29/2019 at 14:30 • Filed to: None

1

29

Of course, you won’t find out about this on any G/O site

Here is his !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:38

1

McMike beat you to it.

marshknute > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:39

7

My employer told me to stop doing something but I did the something and he fired me for doing the something.

dogisbadob > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 10/29/2019 at 14:40

0

oops

shame on me for not refreshing the page first :(

dogisbadob > marshknute 10/29/2019 at 14:41

14

The GMG union has a contract that provides them with editorial freedom. Ste f Schrader posted the bylaw regarding it in that thread

fintail > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:42

7

Funniest thing, sports doesn’t stick to sports. Athletes don’t stick to sports. I wonder which sponsor or suit was offended, probably by criticism of something related to 45.

Petchesky was probably the best writer there, he should land on gree ner pastures eventually.

Sampsonite24-Earth's Least Likeliest Hero > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:44

5

yeah this has wrongful termination written all over it

Future next gen S2000 owner > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:44

5

There is a distinction between editorial freedom and flouting your boss.

Sovande > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 14:45

1

I like that one post from ten days ago where he said “ It’s not rape it’s surprise sex.” That was comedy gold. A shame this great voice has been silenced.

RPM esq. > marshknute 10/29/2019 at 14:47

10

Presumably you don’t work in an editorial position with a union contract that guarantees you editorial freedom, and if you did, you might feel some kind of way about getting shitcanned right after pointing out that your employer was in violation of that contract.

dogisbadob > Future next gen S2000 owner 10/29/2019 at 14:48

1

There is a distinction when a pre-existing contract requires flouting your boss

Cash Rewards > Sovande 10/29/2019 at 14:50

5

I think that was from 13 years ago, not ten days ago? I swore i saw that and the datebstsmp said 2006. a few of the deadspin writers have written about their change in attitudes and written words in the last decade. Barry certain ly said some terrible, unfunny shit. I think that’s fair to acknowledge that, but I also think it’s fair to not let it go.

But lord knows 20 year me said some dumb shit

Sampsonite24-Earth's Least Likeliest Hero > Future next gen S2000 owner 10/29/2019 at 14:54

2

a contract is a contract. nowhere does it state that you have editorial freedom as long as you dont say mean things about the owners

This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 15:00

1

What exactly did he expect?

Editor Barry, not Emperor . Welcome to the corporate world, where you do what you’re told or in the batt of an eye you’re replaced with someone who will .

The bosses tell him something he doesn’t want to hear and not only does he refuse to comply but he doubles down in defiance. He got hims elf fired and put the writers who answer to him in jeopardy by supporting this campaign .

If he had just stuck to sports he’d still be around to at least try to negotiate his position. Now unfortunately he’s just a footnote.

He should have checked his privilege .

Sovande > Cash Rewards 10/29/2019 at 15:06

1

You are correct, I completely misread the time stamp. Apologies.

Cash Rewards > Sovande 10/29/2019 at 15:07

2

No worries!

This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: > Sovande 10/29/2019 at 15:33

1

He didn’t get the “ joke” he attempted to plagiarize correct either. It was easily over 6 years old at that point. I first heard it on ClubSi around y2k. “Rape is such an ugly word. Let’s call it Surprise Sex instead.”

Wait. Was he the guy that spent his first advance on a Honda?

The plot thickens!

RPM esq. > This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: 10/29/2019 at 16:01

4

The editorial employees have a union contract that guarantees them editorial independence. He is an editor who got fired for refusing to surrender editorial independence. This is not that complicated, bootlicker.

marshknute > RPM esq. 10/29/2019 at 16:14

2

So what? G/O fired him anyway. He can sue them for wrongful termination, but they’re not going to rehire him. They either agree to a settlement, or take it to trial. If Barry gets a generous jury, he could get all of Deadspin Hulk Hogan’ed. I doubt he wants to be responsible for getting all of his former colleagues laid off.

G/O holds all the cards and Barry forgot that he has no leverage.

RPM esq. > marshknute 10/29/2019 at 16:28

4

I don’t disagree, factually, with a single word of your first paragraph. What I don’t understand is how that logic leads you to side with management, rather than with Barry, who got fired for standing up for the editorial independence guaranteed in the CBA, and which the editorial employees clearly view as essential to doing their jobs. The second paragraph is just dumb. He obviously knew exactly what he was doing.

G/O is killing its own golden goose for no good reason: they bought a popular website with a distinctive voice and a loyal readership and somehow didn’t realize that intentionally and methodically destroying the distinctive voice in order to avoid any criticism at all will make the popular website less popular and only generate more criticism (largely from the formerly loyal readership).

This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: > RPM esq. 10/29/2019 at 16:35

1

Way to be excellent there pal. This is why you can’t have nice things, because you don’t know how to act.

The owners have enough cash on hand to not give a single solitary fuck about the repercussions of breaking that contract, and that’s only a worry if it’s proven they’ve actually broken it. We’ve only read a snippet. I’m sure they have an army of lawyers to argue for them and enough cash to pay for those lawyers in perpetuity. Does Barry? Does the union? Doubtful.

It was a stupid fucking move.

RPM esq. > This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: 10/29/2019 at 16:47

2

Barry will get a job somewhere else and will be fine. It looks an awful lot like Deadspin won’t be—obviously not because of this one firing, but because of the series of decisions of which it’s a part . That’s shitty management . I stand by the golden goose analysis.

At my job, I’m management, not labor . Sometimes people do things that lead to them losing their jobs . But I’m damn sure not in the habit of firing beloved and successful employees who have been here longer than I have for having opinions about how best to do their jobs, because that’s how you run an organization out of ideas and into the ground.

This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: > RPM esq. 10/29/2019 at 16:48

2

Maybe you should apply to be the new editor. ;)

marshknute > RPM esq. 10/29/2019 at 16:49

2

I don’t side with management. They’re being dicks. I’m only trying to think like a lawyer.

marshknute > dogisbadob 10/29/2019 at 16:54

1

Is this contract typical at media outlets, or unique to GMG?

I can’t fathom why any employer would agree to owning a business that they can’t control.

This certainly isn’t the case at CNN, as evidence by r ecent leaks that have exposed how employees are forced to follow Jeff Zucker’s wishes regardless of their own political beliefs.

RPM esq. > This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: 10/29/2019 at 16:59

2

Hey, I know what most of the punctuation marks do, and I definitely know more about soccer than Haisley.

dogisbadob > marshknute 10/29/2019 at 17:00

1

I honestly don’t know how prevalent these types of contracts are in journalism/media.

RPM esq. > marshknute 10/29/2019 at 17:01

1

That’s an interesting point, because I am one, and if I was G/O’s I think I would have advised them differently. Glad we can agree they’re being dicks.

This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: > RPM esq. 10/29/2019 at 17:09

1

But if someone in a leadership position below you were to do the exact opposite of your instructions while proverbially looking you in the eye , would you allow it to proceed unchecked? Sometimes drastic measures are taken, if but to make a point and for no other reason. If they’ll can him for stepping out of line, nobody is safe. That was their message I suspect.

I’m not suggesting management has made the right decisions leading up to this, I’m not saying Barry’s position was wrong, but everyone really needs to take a moment and consider who’s writing their paychecks. They’re not working for a Times group or a Postmedia or people who necessarily care about journalism or it’s integrity. They’re working for some straight up ruthless wolf of wall street level types of business people who extract maximum value from flailing failing organizations that they scooped up for pennies on the dollar. They’re a 600lb gorilla, and it’s going to take more than sheer righteous indignation to survive in their playpen.

RPM esq. > This is what we'll show whenever you publish anything on Kinja: 10/29/2019 at 17:38

2

In your hypothetical, no, I wouldn’t let it go without at comment at least , but I’d at least listen to the opinions of experienced professionals who know their job better than I do. I t’s also different because my employees don’t have a contract that guarantees the right to make certain decisions without interference from me. If they did, I’d like to think I’d be smart enough to not try to control those decisions, or fire someone for standing up for the right to make them . M ore to the point, I know I’m smart enough not to get in the way of someone doing their job in a way that makes the company successful just to protect my own fragile ego.

You’re obviously right about the business people involved here, except that they keep saying they do care about journalism and its integrity and then doing the opposite for explicitly anti-integrity reasons ( i.e. , no media criticism ) . The organization wasn’t available for pennies on the dollar because the content was bad — the content and readership were an undervalued asset because of the circumstances of Gawker’s demise. S o why try to change the content for the worse? It’s not a perfect analogy but it’s something like if the Astros’ advanced analytics told them that a catcher’s cannon of an arm was undervalued because his current team’s pitchers gave up too many HRs to ever have to throw anybody out , so the Astros got him on the cheap but then made him play DH, rendering the cannon arm worthless.