You'll Never Eat Lunch In This Frank Gehry-designed Cafeteria Again
I started writing a comment in the Gawker post about my dismissal yesterday from Conde Nast but I guess it's better to post these thoughts here. Prepare for long-winds and periods of heavy self-serving sleet, Hurricane Krucoff coming thru...
First, as many people have noted, there is absolutely no need to direct any pity towards me. (Of course, "free drinks" and "job offers" should never be thought of as "pity.") I'll be fine. My main concern is convincing my mom of that. It's been a rough year and blogging certainly has done quite a tap dancing number on my ass, both personally/professionally and positively/negatively, but I've emerged with new and improved layers of skin that are handy in these situations. The only thing thicker may be the irony, which I am the first to admit makes this latest twist slightly funny. Former Gawker Mentor/current Daily Transomer Choire Sicha was the first to respond to an email I sent around right after it happened and put it best: "i'll cry a bit when i finish laughing hysterically."
The thing that sucks the most about losing my job is I really liked it. That's been rare for me (probably for most people) and my bosses were pushing to get me permanent employee status. Conde Nast had all my loyalty and as soon as I took the job in June I adapted a very anti-Gawker stance (albeit playful) here if you hadn't noticed. I never did anything intentionally to compromise Conde Nast's name, value, reputation in the market, reveal the tiniest sliver of insider info or competitive intelligence. Accusations to the contrary are a bit hurtful. With that, let me add to a few of the comments I've seen around...
Radosh/Susie - Points well taken and as a freelancer they could have let me go if my shoes and socks didn't match but as I mentioned, I never leaked any "private" Conde Nast information while I was there, on or off the clock. Yes of course they knew of my Gawker connection before but I signed a confidentiality agreement and I intended to stick to it. If guilt by association is the charge then I never should have been hired. I'm sure Si Newhouse and Chuck Townsend did not review my resume in the beginning so maybe if they had I wouldn't have been offered the job. In any case, they seem very paranoid and unsure of what to make of the Internet and especially blogs. Just look at the Conde Nast websites, to say they have a cutting-edge Internet strategy would make Jukt Micronics look like Microsoft.
Forwarding the "server down" email was a thoughtless and regretful act, there's not much to read into it. IM/web access (that includes connection to my "regular" Yahoo email) were down so when the company email about server problems arrived I didn't think twice when I used it to write Jesse about something completely unrelated. I did not think for a second that Jesse, who I am friends with outside of this media/blog micro-colony, would use the email for Gawker fodder and when I saw it posted I immediately thought "holy fuck." Now I will only communicate via phone text messages. Gawker at least owes me a fuckin' Treo so my thumbs don't fall off.
If there isn't enough irony in this for you, add the fact that I was quoted JUST LAST WEEK in Crain's about bloggers who get fired from their job. (Read here on Property Grunt.) I sided with the companies and stated two simple rules: 1) don't blog about your work 2) don't blog during work hours. These rules were not broken. Do I need a third rule? Okay, 3) Don't forward company emails to anyone, especially Jesse Oxfeld, even if you explicitly say "do not publish" or think the receiving party would figure that out on their own.
And look ma, I made the New York Times.
First, as many people have noted, there is absolutely no need to direct any pity towards me. (Of course, "free drinks" and "job offers" should never be thought of as "pity.") I'll be fine. My main concern is convincing my mom of that. It's been a rough year and blogging certainly has done quite a tap dancing number on my ass, both personally/professionally and positively/negatively, but I've emerged with new and improved layers of skin that are handy in these situations. The only thing thicker may be the irony, which I am the first to admit makes this latest twist slightly funny. Former Gawker Mentor/current Daily Transomer Choire Sicha was the first to respond to an email I sent around right after it happened and put it best: "i'll cry a bit when i finish laughing hysterically."
The thing that sucks the most about losing my job is I really liked it. That's been rare for me (probably for most people) and my bosses were pushing to get me permanent employee status. Conde Nast had all my loyalty and as soon as I took the job in June I adapted a very anti-Gawker stance (albeit playful) here if you hadn't noticed. I never did anything intentionally to compromise Conde Nast's name, value, reputation in the market, reveal the tiniest sliver of insider info or competitive intelligence. Accusations to the contrary are a bit hurtful. With that, let me add to a few of the comments I've seen around...
Radosh/Susie - Points well taken and as a freelancer they could have let me go if my shoes and socks didn't match but as I mentioned, I never leaked any "private" Conde Nast information while I was there, on or off the clock. Yes of course they knew of my Gawker connection before but I signed a confidentiality agreement and I intended to stick to it. If guilt by association is the charge then I never should have been hired. I'm sure Si Newhouse and Chuck Townsend did not review my resume in the beginning so maybe if they had I wouldn't have been offered the job. In any case, they seem very paranoid and unsure of what to make of the Internet and especially blogs. Just look at the Conde Nast websites, to say they have a cutting-edge Internet strategy would make Jukt Micronics look like Microsoft.
Forwarding the "server down" email was a thoughtless and regretful act, there's not much to read into it. IM/web access (that includes connection to my "regular" Yahoo email) were down so when the company email about server problems arrived I didn't think twice when I used it to write Jesse about something completely unrelated. I did not think for a second that Jesse, who I am friends with outside of this media/blog micro-colony, would use the email for Gawker fodder and when I saw it posted I immediately thought "holy fuck." Now I will only communicate via phone text messages. Gawker at least owes me a fuckin' Treo so my thumbs don't fall off.
If there isn't enough irony in this for you, add the fact that I was quoted JUST LAST WEEK in Crain's about bloggers who get fired from their job. (Read here on Property Grunt.) I sided with the companies and stated two simple rules: 1) don't blog about your work 2) don't blog during work hours. These rules were not broken. Do I need a third rule? Okay, 3) Don't forward company emails to anyone, especially Jesse Oxfeld, even if you explicitly say "do not publish" or think the receiving party would figure that out on their own.
And look ma, I made the New York Times.
