Elliott C. Back: Internet & Technology

Gizmodo Sucks, Loses Credibility

Posted in Blogging,Scandal by Elliott Back on January 12th, 2008.

I’m feeling like gadget blog Gizmodo (nofollow) has lost all its credibility in the blogging world. I am sure you’ve all hear about their scandal at CES 2008, which has hurt all bloggers’ credibility and left at least one of their staff banned from CES for life. Ironically, Gizmodo even had the stones to blog about it, calling their childish prank “the meanest thing Gizmodo did at CES (nofollow):”

CES has no shortage of displays. And when MAKE offered us some TV-B-Gone clickers to bring to the show, we pretty much couldn’t help ourselves. We shut off a TV. And then another. And then a wall of TVs. And we just couldn’t stop.

Their title implies Gizmodo did other, but less mean, things at CES. I don’t get why they decided to sabotage a trade show? Their actions show they were there as irresponsible bloggers, and not the members of the press their badges said they were. This isn’t the only thing that’s made me give up on them, though. Here’s a running list:

1) Posting porn to Kotaku

If you check out this apology note from Kotaku, a well respected gaming blog, you’ll find that a Gizmodo editor decided “to post a very inappropriate photo on the top of Kotaku using someone else’s name.” The photo, an obscene shock / porn image known as “Tubgirl” was visible on the site for at least 20 minutes before a Kotaku editor noticed and removed it.

2) Immature staff

I can’t help but reproduce this photo from a pit stop competition (nofollow) Gizmodo did where they thought it would make a cool and professional photo of them all giving the finger. Such displays have their place, but stick them in your Facebook photos where your other drunk exploits go, please?

3) Misleading stories, headlines

When there isn’t news, according to Apple Gazette, Brian Lam–editor of Gizmodo–will just make some up, dropping a delicious teaser story a year ago about the iPhone. Unfortunately, he wasn’t writing about the Apple iPhone, he was writing about the Cisco one. Nevertheless, making it seem like it was about Apple got Gizmodo lots of hits.

4) Gizmodo’s foray into porn

We’ve heard that the “internet is for porn,” but Gizmodo keeps posting inappropriate gadget-unrelated material to their homepage, the latest of which is a tour of the AVN expo (nofollow) also occurring near CES. Sexuality and technology is an interesting topic–one that magazines like Wired cover better and more professionally–but Gizmodo is incapable of handling adult matters with delicacy, and just ruts around with them in the mud.


If you use wordpress and would like to boycott Gizmodo, you can run a simple database query to add nofollow to all of their links:

UPDATE wp_posts SET post_content = replace(post_content, '<a href="http://gizmodo', '<a rel="nofollow" href="http://gizmodo') WHERE post_content LIKE '%gizmodo%' AND post_content NOT LIKE '%nofollow%'
UPDATE wp_posts SET post_content = replace(post_content, '<a href="http://www.gizmodo', '<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.gizmodo') WHERE post_content LIKE '%gizmodo%' AND post_content NOT LIKE '%nofollow%'

This checks to see if any of the old links have a rel attribute in them. This SQL will only touch posts with Gizmodo in them, so rest safe, but at the same time don’t trust me either!

Update: Somehow Gizmodo now thinks that their childish prank is hard hitting journalism (nofollow). How is turning off TVs at a conference about TVs journalism? Would it be excellent journalism if you also firebombed the place?

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 12th, 2008 at 9:51 pm and is tagged with . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback.

48 Responses to “Gizmodo Sucks, Loses Credibility”

  1. GizNO says:

    All it took for me was the ‘lost’ iPhone scandal. Buying a ‘lost’ iPhone to get a scoop, then trying to hide behind the shield of ‘journalism’ from any legal fallout was as low as low can be. It was at that point I stopped going to Gizmodo. Everyone can complain all they want, the only way to ‘hurt’ sites is to stop clicking on them. Traffic is their bread and butter… a website with no traffic is like a store with no customers.

  2. Sean says:

    I wasn’t banned by Diaz on gizmodo.com but I was banned from io9.com by Annalee Newitz for a comment that simply criticized her review of the latest Sherlock Holmes movie, which she titled “Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is Gayer, Steamier, and Explodier Than Before.” I simply pointed out that I had heard the same drivel about the first movie and almost didn’t see it because they made it sound like the Brokeback Mountain of action movies. I guess expressing any sort of opinion that doesn’t agree with the writer is now enough to get you banned on ANY of the Gawker websites. I’m done with all of them. I really hope Gawker goes completely under.

  3. nad2245 says:

    Gizmodo is a ****** rag! I will stop visiting their rubbish website.

    They banned me for daring to speak against their subtle racism!

    I hope you all get fired, Jizmodo-employees. Sam Biddle should never be allowed to write again!

  4. YvesDadi says:

    I haven’t been banned from giz yet but I have seen them move towards less commenting by people. Using their new site is difficult to say the least. I can’t figure out how to reply to the idiots that reply to my comments. Oh well I guess I’m just dumb.

    I thought that prank was childish and unprofessional. They deserve what they get for it. No amount of ‘were not sorry’ and more lame excuses to cover for themselves will ever be enough. They act like they don’t care but inside you know they feel like complete idiots. I hope they do anyways.

    • I got banned from giz during the tv-b-gone scandal – i never got a response but my post was basically saying I’m ashamed of giz staff and they shouldn’t be doing things like that.. and the banned me.. .haven’t visited the site since..

  5. Charlie says:

    I’m now a former Gizmodo reader, mostly because of Jesus Diaz and his inability to write original, quality content. He’s been called out for recycling old material and not checking his facts by a great many readers; I’m the most recent one, and after he took away my star on the site and banned me (the ban was reversed, the star is gone for good it seems) he then went on to use news of this to threaten other dissenters. I think the only reason I’m no longer banned is the chorus of other folks who called him out on the same article.

    Ban me or not, I’m done with Gizmodo – a blog that retains people like that has no credibility.

  6. Mike says:

    Gizmodo is one the most unprofessional and biased sites I’ve ever seen. If a product doesn’t have an “i” infront of it, they think it doesn’t deserve the praise. CNET and Engadget are the exact same, although Engadget isn’t as bad as CrapNET and JizzModo. Every day the majority of Articles on Gizmodo and CNET are ALWAYS about Apple. These “journalists” are so closed minded. Half the time they just copy and paste, and they call themselves journalists? These people obviously sleep with an Apple product. Apple products are way overpriced and offer lower performance compared to their competition.

    iPhone vs Android: The only good thing the iPhone has going for it is it’s retina display, which really isn’t that great compared to samsungs AMOLED. Does the iPhone have a removable battery? SD-Card Slot? Good reception if touching antenna? Does the back not crack when dropped? Productive Apps? Most of their apps are useless and mindless games. Flash? More than half of videos online use flash, it’s because Steve Jobs is a whining turtle neck ***** that it’s not used by them. Can a macbook or iMac outperform a High-end PC? I didn’t think so, so really what makes Apple so dam special Gizmodo/CNET? Tell me.

  7. Add me to the list of former of Gizmodo readers. They had pretty much lost me a year or so ago, but I hung around.

    The articles have gotten worse, and worse. Filler mostly. Or some hack writers half-assed opinion. As if I need to hear a gadget blog editorialize or discuss politics. Rosa Golijan is a perfect example. Then again, her superiors are no better. All the way up to Jason Chen.

    Not surprising to see so many of you in here complaining of the same issues – unable to take criticism, unprofessional attitudes, lack of substance, etc etc.

    Don’t believe me? Write an email to a Gizmodo writer. If that email is even slightly critical, including positive criticism (i.e. you said this, which is good, i wish you had also say something else too), and watch the response. You’ll get one of two things: either an automated response, a completely dismissive response, or an all out “why don’t you just leave then?”

    Fine. I will. And it looks like I’m not alone.

    Here’s to hoping that their readership continues to decline and they eventually fade away. Spread the word, Gizmodo is trash.

  8. Ubermex says:

    I was banned by Jesus Diaz for pointing out a strawman. I complained to Jason Chen, who said my comments were fine and unbanned me. Then, before I could even post again, Jesus banned me AGAIN just REREADING the comments.

  9. sojiwww says:

    wow. I didn’t even know about what happened at CES. But what really bothered me was the iphone4 thing. Who would actually put it up there, in full detail, and blow it for everyone? I mean, a little picture would have been intriguing, but come-on. And the means that they got it were probably illegal. I always go to engadget because they have never offended me, and seem just a step closer to professionalism.

  10. eCommArchitect says:

    Banned from Giz :( I went to their off topic channel and commented how Jason Chen, in his own words, would rather play with his phone than talk to his wife. Banned. They are way too sensitive to allow comments if this is how they moderate.

  11. john says:

    Gizmodo makes me want to retch just opening their webpage. They cant go on for 5 minutes without praising apple for this or that. Morons got banne dfrom the latest apple event and they still lick their boots. I just hope steve “rim” jobs does not show in the gizmodo office cuz his “wii” is gonna be so sore from all the B.J.’s he’s gonna get.

  12. mmee1000 says:

    Gizmodo has officially lost me as a reader today. After reading 2 anti-Sony article in as many days, I can longer stand the vendettas they seem to have against anything not Apple or Nintendo or Microsoft.

    They had one editorial about what’s more useless tech…motion controls or 3D…with pictures of the PS3 only.

    Then they write this completely slanted rant about how sad it is that Sony has lost E3 and the console war in general…contradicting themselves the entire way thru.

    Avoid Gizmodo. I don’t know what’s gotten into them recently…the slant they have is unbearable. It might be the free XBox 360 they got from Microsoft (like all who attended the Microsoft conference at E3). They have people with titles such as “editor” and “reporter”…they’re just bloggers with a bit more access than everyone else…it doesn’t make them journalists…in fact associating them with real journalists is an insult to those who actually provide a fair and unbiased view of the industry.

  13. Brian says:

    Jesus Diaz is a fanboi piece of ****. I don’t think he could muster an intelligent article if half the staff helped him. His bias is disgusting, and he bans anyone who points out what a joke he is.

    Anyone who takes Giz to be a serious tech site, needs their head checked.

    • djb says:

      Word up brotha. Just got banned yesterday for criticizing Jesus for the same thing.

    • Ilya says:

      Just got banned by Diaz this afternoon. He’s a sensitive little fella, isn’t he. Doesn’t like it when people point out his deliberately misleading headlines. Oh well.

  14. lazybloke says:

    I just got banned by ginger pubes Matt Buchanan but I guess I deserved it for telling the truth. They wrote an article looking for a NYC intern to “do research” and I quietly asked why such a position exists if they’re just going to take all their article ideas from Reddit.com

    Guess the truth hurt that ginger monkey too much?

  15. modernheretic says:

    Jesus Diaz seems like the most biased fanboi at Giz. His articles are written like some narcissistic school yard bully who compares ice-cream cones against the neighborhoods welfare children. Totally unprofessional even for a fanboi, I’m guessing he was dropped repeatedly as a child.

  16. TekWarren says:

    I just got banned for commenting and was told by Adam Frucci that my single word comment of “Lame” on an article about sexting and funny names was neither “civil” or “intelligent”.

    I probably have less than half a dozen comments on Giz and have never put anyone down or used swear words. Others in the article felt the same way and there where other single word comments. I guess because I don’t have a star next to my name and someone was feeling all power trippy he decided to ban me. BS…I emailed the Editorial Director but not expecting any changes.

  17. Dewski says:

    I got banned today, for a comment that any respectable site would have appreciated. It added to the conversation (multiple replies, even the author of the article replied…)

    And now I am no longer going frequent that site, i am sure they dont care.

  18. Saiton says:

    Giz is the Faux Gnus of blog journalism, its a unfunny Onion and fanboi cult of clones dressed in black turtle necks and cheap wrinkled jeans. Simply put, Giz is rotten to it’s core giving the company it so highly represents a bad name.

  19. […] clicking around, looking for fun Gizsucks images, and happened across two articles. The first one: Gizmodo Sucks, Loses Credibility. Its old, but just about everything written is how I feel, and the comments are pretty much dead […]

  20. f says:

    Was banned from comments… for not being an Apple fanboi.

  21. James says:

    Does tech interest trump civility?

  22. Ed says:

    I too have been banned by gizmodo. I suspect it was because I pointed out that Mr. Diaz made no sense when he wrote a recent article and that he seemed to have been consuming alcohol at the time. Ok, I can see how that would piss someone off. But they don’t answer any of my emails when I ask about my banning and they constantly talk trash about others. I figured they could take a little themselves. Apparently not.

  23. Mike M. says:

    I just got banned for jokingly asking them if they could literally go 30 minutes without writing something about Apple.

    I was trying to piont out their fanboyism. They banned me.

    Anyone good at hacking websites?

  24. dickinabox says:

    I also was recently locked from commenting. I wish I could tell you why, but to this day no one has ever explained that to me. 3 emails later and still no reply. I think it’s sad because I don’t have other websites I go to for that stuff…I just stumbled across their site; liked what I saw; and joined up. Now they’ve taken a pretty loyal fan and turned it sour.

    • DavidLvnsky says:

      Well, it’s unlikely that you’ll see this since it’s been over a year, but you could try one of the other Gawker Media blogs. While they are still technically affiliated with gizmodo none of them are anywhere near as bad. In fact, gizmodo is widely considered to be the “black sheep” of the Gawker family from what I can tell.

  25. haha says:

    I think you’re just jealous.

  26. Rogelio says:

    I was banned from their site for no real reason.

    They had a contest, and all you had to do was post a caption to an image.
    I posted the caption to the image (it was not profane or anything), and suddenly my account was locked from posting.

    I emailed asking why and they said I need to make contributing comments, not just blurt anything I feel (which is not what I did in the first place).

    I thought long and hard before posting a second time. Finally I felt I had a good argument to post. I read it sevral times and checked for language and grammar.

    once I posted, I was locked again, this time I asked why, and they didnt respond.

    They suck. Dvice.com posts a helluva lot less news, but is completely un-biased.

  27. BeautifulAgony says:

    I have to say, I have mixed opinions of Gizmodo. On one hand, there is often a wide variety of technology related articles (although, admittedly, they do stray). On the other hand, their bias is extremely evident.

    What must be remembered, however, is that a blog, they are under no obligation to provide any semblance of legitimacy to their endeavor. Although it would be in their best interest to have accountability and show journalistic integrity, it is not required, in any sense.

    If you look at my comments there (same name, BeautifulAgony) you'll see that I am often extremely outpsoken about their bias, lack of integrity and obvious trolling with headlines. I also criticize the people who somehow, erroneously, feel that Gizmodo should be some bastion of integrity and responsbility.

    The banning, disemvoweling and rampant Headline Trolling is simply their way of doing business. Will it bite them in the ***? Perhaps. Are they wrong for doing it? No. They have every right to conduct themselves, ont heir website, as they see fit. My exception to condoning their behavior stops, however, when they enter the real world and engage in childish, and or dangerous, pranks. I can't endorse that sort of behavior, and I do hope they would learn a lesson.

    I haven't been banned from Gizmodo, (as of this posting) despite my overtly critical remarks, but then I tend to be evenhanded about my criticisms, neither singling anyone out, nor needlessly bashing on Gizmodo writers.

    It will be interesting to see if Gizmodo's rampant banning and disemvoweling hurts their readership, but somehow I doubt it will. There are always thousands of new clickthroughs, and relative to that, a small number of commenters. Those who do comment tend to be a rather vocal minority who comment regularly. It could wellbe that Gizmodo is loathe to ban/disemvowel well known commenters, knowing that it could result in backlash that would cast them in a (more) negative light.

    For now I continue to visit and comment there, despite their lapses in judgment. I maintain my evenhanded criticism of both the writers, the topics and other commenters.

    Should they decide to ban/disemvowel me, well, I may not like it or agree with their reasons, but its not as though they don't reserve the right to do it. It's no different than having a critical loudmouth in your home during a party. You reserve the right to throw them out for any reason, if you disagree with them or find them suddenly unappealing or obnoxious.

    Everyone would do well to remember that, and keep it foremost in their mind, rather than feel hurt or wounded by being cast out, as though some rights have been denied. A privilege was lost, no rights were infringed upon. Just a thought.

  28. Rutager says:

    I agree. While the Gizmodo **** were sucking apple' s **** for the last year, they have now moved to sucking Obama's ****. I have quit going to their site altogether.

  29. achtung says:

    Gizmodo is a joke. If you make ANY comment mentioning their loyalty to Apple they will disemvowel/ban you on the spot.

    It's ridiculous. They have absolutely zero credibility.

  30. Trollerton says:

    They are pompous ******** and accept absolutely no criticism.

    I'm a troll and will be the first to admit that. I spend most of my time mixing poop jokes into my honest opinions. They had absolutely no problem with my poop and ***** comments, but when they crossed the line by making a post that was extremely derogatory towards a portion of the population I had to put my ***** jokes aside and criticize the post. I was banned on the spot.

    I'm not a complete idiot, I have several engineering degrees and for the most part only blog out of boredom when nothing is going amiss at work. I have a rather large following of trolls and downtime bloggers as well as fellow gamers and for a while had a link to Gizmodo on my personal websites. I have removed that link and tempted placing a link to this in it's place, but honestly I don't want to give them the traffic

    Thanks for letting me rant, this is the last post I will make regarding the site. On a side note, the Gawker network is still a good place to go, I just won't be going to Gizmodo.

  31. An says:

    oh my gosh guys it was a joke people cant laugh anymore

  32. Rob says:

    Ha, I noticed a bunch of people pointing out a mistake on Gizmodo today. Since it was an article by Jesus Diaz, I can’t help but wonder if a dozen new ex-Gizmodo commenters will join us today.

  33. Grrrr says:

    Rob, I was banned a few months back for no reason by Mr. Diaz as well. I agree I really enjoyed Gizmodo, I was a commenter for years. I believe I was banned for pointing out that the story was not new and had actually been reported in the WSJ a few months back, but I will never really know the real reason since no one told me.

    I agree with your rationale, I dislike Gizmodo now because of how they treat their readers. There appears to be no consideration made for my years of commenting, over 400 comments I believe.

    I feel like I contributed a lot to the site and that if someone had a problem with me they should tell me.

    So I no longer read gizmodo, I doubt my 10 less page views a day will help, but it at least makes me feel better.

  34. Rob says:

    Unlike the rest of you, I loved Gizmodo.com (the site, not necessarily the prank you address). I have always felt they covered the tech and gizmos that interest me, and they manage to make me laugh sometimes. I have given ‘em hell sometimes in my comments, if I don’t like their angle, are covering something they’ve already covered, etc., and been a fairly active commenter in my favorite blog.

    But I got banned from commenting on Gizmodo.com yesterday. I didn’t use profanity, threaten anyone, or link to spam. The only reason I can figure I got banned from Gizmodo is because I mentioned the author of the article (Mr. Diaz) had a couple glaring mistakes, and said (in jest) that must mean the author didn’t get enough sleep. Next thing I know my commenting privileges are gone.

    It really sucks to get banned from your favorite blog when you didn’t see it coming. How do you keep liking something that rejects you? Maybe I should join the dark side, seems to be at least 8 gizmodo haters I can team up with.

    Wait a second… Did all you guys all get kicked off too? That’s really the only reason I can see to hate the blog itself, assuming you can handle R-rated content from time to time (which I do).

    Oh well, if nothing else, people can come here (GizmodoSucks.com seems to bring you here) and add stories of their banning.

  35. sam says:

    yeah they really do suck. i made a comment critical of a recent entry about the developer of a jet pack. the entry consisted of FOUR separate video clips, all on the front page. the accompanying text didn’t summarize what these video might say or explain the general drift of the article.

    my comment was:

    “does EVERYTHING have to be a video? could you at least summarize what this story is about?”

    and for that i was banned.

  36. Sean says:

    Like Kevin pointed out, these guys are ban-happy. A few months ago I was banned for making a light-hearted joke, implying that Lego’s don’t qualify as Gizmos.

    When I commented on it in my profile, they disabled my ability to report problems are ask questions regarding my profile status.
    I was disappointed when they pulled their TV stunt, but I let it go. Now I see that they are just childish.

  37. Nicedomain says:

    Yeah I stopped reading them a few years back. The form of English they speak on that site is literally as bad or perhaps worse than that of youtube comments. I hate the writing style Gizmodo uses so much that I decided I would rather not keep up with the gadgets posted on that site. Its like the write for the 12-16 year old digg audience. The really sad thing is there Alexa rank:

    Gizmodo, the Gadget Guide

    more today on gizmodo jobs…
    gizmodo.com – Cached
    Rank: 573

  38. Gizmodo Sucks says:

    Here have a domain for a while:

  39. Kevin says:

    Agree Gizmodo Sucks.

    I think you need to check out their new article:

    In this they claim that Steve Jobs should not have to reveal any medical problems. The article also compares Steve to FDR and JFK.

    While the article was bad and poorly written, the real fireworks began in the comments section. At last count over 2 dozen readers have been banned from Gizmodo for comments relating to the article.

    Some of the comments took offense to the comparison of Steve to JFK and FDR. Others disagreed with the article and felt that Steve should disclose his medical problems. All of the above were banned.

    It appears that the banning was the result of a childish act by Jesus Diaz a senior editor at Gizmodo. Multiple commenters pointed out that Jesus had written an editorial and should expect some disagreement. However, these were the last comments that these writers would make at Gizmodo. All those dissenting were banned.

    So as an FYI, in case you didn’t notice Gizmodo is an Apple dominated site. And anyone disagreeing with the views of the staff will be summarily banned.

  40. Joe says:

    No kidding, l HATE gizmodo; and NEVER click on their digg articles, seems like they steal A LOT of their stories for other smaller web sites as well.

  41. Smabblering says:

    I agree with majority of your rant about Gizmodo, indeed they are very childish. Good on you for posting this. Oh and by the way, Kotaku are no where near respected, they are terribly biased and just drive complete BS headlines and stories for hits/views.

Leave a Reply