Not at all what I'm saying, but one of them went into a profession where publicity was the name of the game and the other is just trying to buy groceries with your kids. The paparazzi has been harassing celebrities for decades; it isn't right but it isn't new, and people look down on the people those photographers and often grief them. Cyberbullies taking pictures with their phones behind someone's back for fake internet points that give them some sort of credence in their community is just flat-out disgusting.
>and people look down on the people those photographers and often grief them
And in this case, the people publishing those photos (gawker) are hypocritically bashing other people for publishing much less invasive photos (reddit). So the idea that the invasion of celebrities privacy is looked down on already seems a bit unrealistic.
>Cyberbullies taking pictures with their phones behind someone's back for fake internet points that give them some sort of credence in their community is just flat-out disgusting.
You just keep stating your opinion as if it were a logical answer to the question. I understand that you feel that way. I am not asking what you feel. I am asking how gawker's photos are less bad than creepshots. I don't think taking pictures of fully clothed people in public areas is disgusting, so expecting me to suddenly just take your word for it is pretty silly.
Gawker has nothing to do with this at the core of the issue; these subreddits exist with or without them. They've been a burden to users who see them as the embarrassing drunk uncle and the reason why Reddit isn't taken more seriously. Your community is only as good as you shape it to be, and if you want to boast that you're the front page of the internet, you are expected to sustain worthwhile content that isn't overrun by village idiots who end up pushing the key contributors away.
Having standards isn't throwing freedom out the window. Regardless of whether or not Reddit's stance is to be as neutral as possible, those involved with the growth and monetization of the site need to address this before someone else does if they want the site to continue to thrive.
Yes, gawker does have something to do with it. You said it is ok for them to post pictures of celebrity crotches, and it is horrible and disgusting for other people to post pictures of random people just standing around fully clothed in public, where tons of people can see them already. You were asked for clarification as to why you feel one is ok and the other isn't, and you just said "one is Lindsay Lohan". You still haven't explained why you think one is ok and the other is not, and your posts continue to try to drag things further and further from that question.
Didn't actually say that. Gawker is and has been a terrible company for as long as I can remember. But their actions have nothing to do with these ongoing issues that keep cropping up with Reddit. If they didn't do the witchhunt, someone else would have.
Again, you have ignored the question. What makes posting pictures of Lindsay Lohan's crotch more acceptable than posting pictures of fully clothed women standing around in public?
