We've just published an explosive exposé. Please don't read it.
GQ tries to publish a story and spike it at the same time, because management at Conde Nast is either (a) completely craven or (b) engaged in a very subtle marketing scheme based on reverse psychology. I'm betting on (a).
Update: Gawker has posted the GQ article and invited its readers to help translate it into Russian.
Update #2: For more on Gawker's project, go here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The Conde Nast pledge: "Government cock will not suck itself. That's what a free and independent media is for."
Seriously. Wired doesn't even expect a call the morning after giving the Obama administration a big, sloppy rimjob.
Why would we attack Russia? I thought they were our friends now?
God, GQ is such a crappy magazine. I hate to say I subscribed for a year. Hoping to learn more about fashion, I was instead pummeled by 50 pages of advertisements before the table of contents and never saw much clothing for less than 200 dollars.
Dude, this was so hamhanded that it has to be choice (b). Did they really think that reporter wouldn't try to turn this into a story?
I read this just after hearing the story on NPR. The link to it is great, Jesse, but are you working on one to the underlying article? It has to be out there somewhere.
where's the asshat who rips on every Cathy Young story claiming she's just trying to make wonderful Mr. Putin look bad?
I do not wear ass as hat!
are you working on one to the underlying article? It has to be out there somewhere.
I suspect someone will have posted it somewhere by the end of the weekend. If I see it I'll add a link.
???? ?????? - I think something's lost in the translation
Something's really lost when you can spell - ???? ?????.
ed: Something's really lost when you can't spell. Or write. Or make sense. I'm going to quit now, while I'm behind.
Something's really lost when you can spell
That may be the most Zen instance of RC'z Law ever, Baked. Well played.
TAO,
Conde Nast did not hide the story because a lone reporter would talk to NPR, thereby generating more publicity than a company with $8B in revenue last year could muster up.
Is my Sarcasmometer on the fritz, or did you really think that?
Explosive expos?
I see what you did there.