Consumerist Forced To Cut Staff

This is the one internal memo I’m unhappy about leaking: In light of the recession, Consumerist will have to say goodbye to two writers. You’ve got two weeks to enjoy the excellent work and writings of Carey Greenberg-Berger and Chris Walters. Our owner, Gawker Media Network, is forcing me to make these very painful cuts. This means it will just be myself and Meghann posting during the week. Not sure what to do about the weekends, maybe we’ll just post some raw reader letters. It’s very sad. Carey has been with us for two years, Chris has been with us for a year. They’ve completely killed during their time, and I’m proud to have worked by their side. The site won’t be the same without them. Any smart publisher would be lucky to hire them now that they’re on the open market. You can read the full text of our boss’s email announcement, inside.

Nick Denton writes:

I have some bad news. Here’s the heart of it: we are cutting 19 of our 133 editorial positions and suspending bonus payments at the start of next year. With the savings, we are increasing base pay and hiring 10 new people on the most commercially successful Gawker sites. But I know that’s scant consolation for the colleagues we’re losing and for those of you who have been enjoying the bonus windfalls from breakout stories.

You can guess the reason for these brutal measures: the recession. Sure, the company is currently profitable and advertising sales are up by about 30% on their level of a year ago. Our biggest clients are consumer electronics and entertainment companies that are relatively well insulated. And, yes, this is not the first time I’ve predicted doom: in July 2006, when we “battened down the hatches” and closed down Sploid and Screenhead; and in April this year, when we spun off Idolator, Gridskipper and Wonkette.

But now the credit crisis is clearly going to affect every sector of the economy. Advertising buys typically plunge after the Christmas shopping season, and 2009 is obviously going to be exceptionally difficult. We have to prepare for the worst, now, rather than when the worst comes upon us.

We never used to talk about the business side of the operation. Traffic was the only concern; my belief was that juicy news would draw the readers and the advertising would take care of itself. We were patient; even if it took four years for a site to develop the audience that finally registered with advertisers, we had the time. No longer.

Sites such as Consumerist, whose success has been measured more in traffic and recognition than in revenue, now need to cover their costs. I can’t underline enough that this harsh commercial judgment is no reflection whatsoever on the editorial teams that are being cut.

Each of these sites performs a vital function. Consumerist provides an outlet for disgruntled consumers that exists nowhere else on the web; Valleywag has given puffed-up Silicon Valley the prick it’s long needed; and Fleshbot manages to be classy and filthy at the same time. The site leads and writers on all of our sites have done exactly what we asked them to: work harder than the competition and grow the audience. It’s my commercial judgment that’s been at fault.

One reason we’re eliminating these positions is to reinforce the teams on the sites with the most commercial appeal—Gizmodo, Kotaku, Lifehacker and Gawker—and the properties such as Jezebel, io9, Deadspin and Jalopnik which are poised to join them.

One new recruit we’re confirming today is Gabriel Snyder from W Magazine in Los Angeles who, as managing editor of Gawker.com, will continue the site’s evolution into a national news and entertainment site. We are also hiring new contributors at Jezebel, Deadspin, Kotaku and io9.

Even in the growing editorial teams we need to control costs. And that means a new look at traffic bonuses. We’ve been spending $50,000 a month on average on pageview bonuses. The scheme has made writers hustle for traffic even in teams so large that there was a risk they become lumbering. It’s helped us hit a record 274m pageviews last
month, up 69% on last September.

Pageview bonuses will continue this quarter. And we are committed to pageview incentives, and to measuring performance by a writer’s individual pageviews, in the long term. But a first quarter spike in traffic — and the resulting bonus payments — could be dangerous if advertising markets are troubled next year. And we’re assuming that the economy is so volatile that most of you would like a little bit more predictability about your own income.

That’s why we’re suspending the pageview bonus for the first quarter at least, but making up for some of the loss of income by raising pay. If you haven’t recently agreed to a new rate, your monthly base amount will automatically be increased by 5% in January.

The news about the job and bonus cuts will be demoralizing. The golden age of the blog is over, people will say. Gawker Media is behaving like those big media companies that we mock so easily. I could come up with some bullshit line about how much worse it would have been to wait until we were forced to control costs; or how much more unpleasant life will be at the many internet ventures and newspapers that won’t make it through the downturn. I could give you my optimistic spin about the glorious future that awaits us on the far side of this downturn.

But there is no escaping the fact that we’re losing some excellent colleagues and the environment next year will be bleak. The one consolation is that there will be plenty of news for us to break — starting with this email, which you are free to leak.

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Half Beast says:

    Weak. Super-weak.

    • D-Bo says:

      @half-beast: +1

    • pojken says:

      If it’s about popularity, let’s hope that the Consumerist gets bigger and more popular. It’s become one of my daily reads since I “discovered” it via Gizmodo. Maybe write about more tech-gadgety returns so you can hop on their skirts. :D

      Any how, sorry to hear about the layoffs. Love the site.

      One thing, I noticed that the Consumerist is pretty much dead over the weekends. I have no life and still check it over and over. Is there any way to spread the articles over the weekend as well? Delay posts or such? Even two or three articles satisfies me for a day.

      • @pojken: Same. I discovered TC via Giz and Kotaku and it’s a real damned shame.

      • shoelace414 says:

        @undefined: Sad to say but it’s probably not about being popular. Gizmodo can sell ads to any cutting edge technology company, io9.com can sell ads to TV shows and movies about Sci-fi. Who exactly will buy ads on consumerist? The “We are customer service corporation?”

    • kc2idf says:

      @half-beast: I, for one, would never have discovered the (apparently quite profitable) Lifehacker and Gizmodo if it wasn’t for the Consumerist. Actually, I stopped reading Gizmodo when I found that much of the technical knowledge of the writers was, actually, incorrect.

      Management (not just of Gawker Media, but in general) need to recognize that sometimes the thing that draws attention to their more profitable products is the less-profitable product lines.

    • pbwingman says:

      @half-beast: I was a convert from Lifehacker. That site has too many articles(and repeats) at this point. Meanwhile Consumerist ends up being many folk’s saving grace when all else fails. Me= sad now.

  2. noi56u says:

    Can you swing a deal with Comcast/Best Buy/Circuit City/et al where they each write one puff piece a week about how great those companies are and keep them on?

    I promise not to question anyone’s journalistic integrity when jobs are on the line…

  3. dlynch says:

    sorry to hear that…. this is one of the gawker properties that i (personally) value the most… tough break, Carey and Chris. all best to you in the future.

    • shorty63136 says:

      @dlynch: I second that. I’ve become a big fan of Chris and Carey’s work here on Consumerist and am still a very rabid fangirl of Gizmodo and Jezebel.

      Best of luck to Chris and Carey – good talent like you is hard to keep and even harder to let go.

    • reflection717 says:

      @dlynch: I also agree. If it wasn’t for the great content on Consumerist I’d have never started reading any of the other Gawker blogs. I hope the powers that be realize the value of this blog beyond dollars and cents from advertising. It is a marketing tool.

  4. Adisharr says:

    One of the few good sites out there – what a shame :(

  5. akacrash says:

    Where can we launch an EECB to protest?!

    • SabreDC says:

      @akacrash:
      nick@gawker.com

      Or you can launch an Executive Snail Mail Carpet Bomb:

      Nick Denton
      76 Crosby St
      NY, NY 10012

      ;-) It’s only fair.

      • zentex says:

        @SabreDC: It’s only fair.

        oh. the. irony.

        • SabreDC says:

          @zentex: How is that ironic? Am I missing something?

          • tenio says:

            @SabreDC:

            Gawker Media is now becoming the “Evil Corporation” that the consumerist is against!

            • coolkiwilivin says:

              @tenio: Yep how ironic in an election year where the Gawker family has been in the tank for Obama, Nick would do this. I love the Dem’s hypocrisy. From We’re making tons of money but we still need to let people go to Moveon using non union workers in LA to Tyler Perry getting busted for being an anti union buster. Definitely sad for consumerist.

              • selectman says:

                @coolkiwilivin: How ironic that coolkiwilivin would say this when he has been a McCain supporter all year. I love his hypocrisy. From that time that he ordered a cheeseburger at McDonalds to his recent trip to Seattle, to that other random, irrelevant thing he did. Definitely a sad day for coolkiwilivin.

  6. trinidon2k says:

    Wow…that sucks. Can your readers donate to keep them around? I’d chip in for that. Or I’d chip in for Ben to work on the weekends. I need my daily consumerist fix!!!

  7. tenio says:

    wut. the. heck.

    I’m sorry :(

  8. Wireless Joe says:

    Consumerist is a victim of its own success; despite increasing pageviews, pimping adblock and other revenue-reducing browsing solutions results in less revenue. I still think it’s weak.

    • WNW says:

      @Wireless Joe: Someone tell me how to allow consumerist (and only consumerist) through adblock plus. It’s the least I can do.

    • I_Spy says:

      @Wireless Joe: Agreed.

      This almost has me feeling guilty for using Firefox with NoScript; almost… If it wasn’t for allowing http://www.consumerist.com; yimg.com; about:blank; google-analytics.com permission to run on my laptop (while denying four other scripts) I might see, and might be inclined, to click on the ads running that generate revenue for this site — which might help to generate more revenue for the site.

      Unfortunately I feel that Consumerist.com is a victim of it’s own success; you’ve taught me how to resist adverts and all their temptation at the expense of your own site.

  9. HarcourtArmstrong says:

    I always thought Consumerist was too good to be funded commercially. It’s too honest and companies fear it and therefore don’t provide advertising revenue. If Consumerist goes, hopefully the Consumer Union will take over where it left off. Either way, I predict I will have to pay for this type of service in the future.

    • sporesdeezeez says:

      @HarcourtArmstrong:

      Interesting point you make. Maybe this is a good time to work on Gawker Media to spin Consumerist off like Wonkette? I’m not any kind of business expert, but I wonder if it’s possible for Consumerist to be converted, so to speak, to a non-profit?

  10. 4ster says:

    Sorry to hear this. With how much I hear Consumerist quoted in the news lately, I assumed there were no problems of this sort, and that things were going well.

    Best to you, Carey and Chris. I hope this all gets turned around soon, and that you can come back.

  11. James says:

    Wow. That’s….

  12. GC says:

    This sucks. :( Consumerist is awesome. Best wishes to those that are out on their butts, especially given the current state of the job market.

  13. chucklebuck says:

    Damn.

  14. Wait, it’s not April 1st. This has GOT to be a joke. Why else would you get rid of 19 people to hire 10?

  15. catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

    *sigh*
    i wouldn’t have found any of the other associated sites if it wasn’t for consumerist. and i get all my friends to read it too
    please tell us they at least get severance packages

  16. ElvinaKaplooyi says:

    Memberships. We want memberships.

  17. Parapraxis says:

    Daddy, why do they have to go?

  18. Juliekins says:

    Shit, Carey and Chris. I am really sorry to hear this. I know it can’t be easy for the “survivors,” either. This is by far my favorite of the Gawker sites. That probably means I am crabby and old, but I don’t care. Consumerist rules.

  19. Phydeaux says:

    I got a better idea. How about letting go of editorial staff that don’t actually know how to do their jobs like Jesus over at Kotaku?

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      @Phydeaux: ZING

    • MercuryPDX says:

      @Phydeaux: +1!!1!1ELEVEN11! ;)

    • Darkest Daze says:

      @Phydeaux: You mean Gizmodo…or was that part of the sarcasm?

    • Fry says:

      @Phydeaux: And what exactly does that mean? Brian Crecente does a great job at that place, and when you read his posts you know where he stands on the topic. Just like with The Consumerist.

      Of course, I wouldn’t have found Kotaku without The Consumerist, but that doesn’t make one editor at one site better than another editor at another site.

    • @Phydeaux: Wow, that was exactly the first thought that jumped into my mind when I saw the headline. It’s Gizmodo, though, not Kotaku.

    • Consumerist-Moderator-Roz says:

      @Phydeaux: This is unnecessary and further not relevant. Please keep your comments civil.

      • GothamGal says:

        @Consumerist-Moderator-Roz:

        I think that this comment is very relevant and I don’t even know who Jesus is. Carey and Chris are excellent at their jobs and I am sad to see them go. This site is excellent all around and it is relevant to point out writers who are not as good. I stopped going to Gizmodo and rarely visit Kotaku because I find the writing can be very juvenile.

    • @Phydeaux: for the record, i like Jesus’ random lego posts… but i never read Gizmodo, i just wait for people to post those links in IRC.

    • Phydeaux says:

      @Phydeaux: right, gizmodo, my bad. Further making it evident that the Gawker staff is usually so tight and uniform it’s hard to tell them apart. This is a good thing.

      However, my inquiry is ENTIRELY relevant, Roz. Like others, I am questioning their dismissal. I am only further “upping the ante” by asking why competent, on-topic and consistant writers are losing their jobs, while nary reigned in loose cannons like Jesus keep on damaging the Gawker brand. I am really, seriously, sincerely interested in knowing.

  20. Dave says:

    Just disabled my ad-blocker permanently for consumerist.com.

  21. crazypants says:

    Thats a shame, too bad Gawker doesn’t realize that if not for the stellar website that is consumerist.com, I (and I’m guessing alot of other people too) would never have stumbled across Gizmodo, Lifehacker, Jalopnik, etc.

    Personally I view this as a gigantic mistake and I’m terribly upset about it to say the least.

    To the two employees that were “let go,” have you considered starting your own consumer advocacy website?

    I would certainly visit it daily if your content was up to par with your postings on the consumerist.

  22. VA_White says:

    That sucks. I am very sorry to see them go.

  23. TVarmy says:

    I’m not going to shoot the messenger. I’m really sorry to hear this, Ben. Since this website has no direct advertising, I’d like having a Paypal link to donate to keep it running. I’m sure this site is also a great asset to Gawker, as I really learned about Consumerist first and then spread out to Slashfood, Kotaku, and Lifehacker.

    • TVarmy says:

      @TVarmy: Oh, oops. Slashfood is with the “other” blog network. Sorry!

    • Phydeaux says:

      @TVarmy: The same. It’s the professionalism, format and consistency of Carey and Chris at The Consumerist that brought me back to the Gawker fold and give Gizmodo and Kotaku second chances. Everyone at The Consumerist is great and speaks as one, unified, consistent voice. Messing with that dynamic is a mistake.

    • eakwave1 says:

      @TVarmy: I’m in!

      Ben?

    • midwestkel says:

      @TVarmy: Same with me, Consumerist popped my cherry then I slept with Gizmodo, Lifehacker, Jalopnik…

    • legwork says:

      @TVarmy: +

      I would definitely cough up a few of my devaluing quarters for the cause.

      The other sites are good, certainly lifehacker, but they always get loaded after consumerist.

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      @TVarmy: yeah, can we at least help pay a stipend to see if you can keep chris and carey around as guest editors or something?

      • LeoSolaris says:

        @catastrophegirl: I am too poor to help now, but I certainly would chip in a few bucks when I am able!

        • ViperBorg says:

          @TVarmy: Yeah, I’d chip in a few bucks too.

          Ben, how about a donate button, if for nothing else, but to help Chris and Carey until they get a new job someplace. I know being in between jobs and be a bitch, and I’m sure it doesn’t help with the sad state of the economy here.

          • onesong says:

            @TVarmy: agreed. this sucks. i sincerely hope that the powers that be at gawker networks are making sure that they’re seeing all of the traffic that is generated by consumerist and other “poorly” performing sites towards the moneymakers. i’d hate to think that consumerist, with little/no outside ad revenue, is being evaluated by the same standards as the more traditional gawker blogs. consumerist generates siginficant television and traditional media exposure, and i know i never would have visted jalopnik or gizmodo were it not for this blog. different metrics for different sites with different objectives, please.
            that said, good luck to cary and chris. you guys will be missed.

  24. youbastid says:

    So they’re cutting 19 people, hiring 10, AND increasing base pay? How much exactly is this supposed to save?

  25. Benguin says:

    Wow, what a total bummer. Best of luck to you two in the future.

  26. azzy says:

    Generally the first thing that should be done in this situation is to try and place these employees elsewhere in the organization… and well, they have blogging experience.. and well, it looks like you’re hiring.

    Lifehacker seems like a good fit to me. Now get it done Mr. Denton.

  27. Raekwon says:

    Hmm too bad this is the only Gawker site I read.

  28. eakwave1 says:

    What can I do to help? No, really. What can we, the readers who love The Consumerist, do to help keep these valued editors who enrich our lives?

    This is my favorite site on the whole internet. Please save Carey and Chris!

  29. Ein2015 says:

    Cut 19, hire 10… right. Couldn’t some of the people just be moved over? Losing a job SUCKS. At least help them find new jobs, please? The Gawker sites seem to have a lot of personal touches to them… so be a real human and help these 19 people out!

    Also, has anybody watched the clickthrough from sites like Consumerist to other sites (such as io9, etc)?

    And while I’m on my rant that Nick Denton will probably never read… has anybody noticed that it seems like the only “advertising” here is for Gawker Artists? Is that because somebody forgot to push advertising for Consumerist or because companies like Apple and Comcast (aka Frank’s Twitter Cable Service) don’t want to appeal to consumers who like hearing that some companies CAN fix their own wrongs?

    Seriously. Not satisfied. I check this website many times daily. I love looking through the morning deals. I love reading success stories.

    Even if this is the way it has to be… can we have a better explanation?

  30. DreamingInGreen says:

    Just wanted to send my deepest regrets and best wishes to Carey and Chris. Consumerist is one of my consistent daily lurking pleasure, and it’s going to be very sad to see it (and Gawker) shift in these difficult times. Best of luck.

  31. Mollyg says:

    I think that this is in some ways counterproductive. I would never have even visited a Gawker site if it were not for Consumerist. I wonder what percentage of Gawker visits are from people coming from Consumerist and the other blogs that are being hit.

  32. Crabby Cakes says:

    Aw shit. This is one sucky week. Best of luck, Carey and Chris. Chris- you’re definitely one of my favorites and I’ll miss your posts, especially the humorous ones that no one seems to get!

    Let us know where you’ll be heading, I’ll keep reading you!

  33. silver-bolt says:

    Hmm, I wonder, does part of this mean that the Jezebels can buy more pot on company dime?

    • Robobot says:

      @navstar: Every Gawker site has a Sitemeter icon on the lower left of the screen. It is located left and down a little from the links to the archives, about, advertising, etc. pages. You can check out page view stats there.

      Back in the days of yee olde Gawker Media I think they actually had some sort of comparison chart between the blogs, but that’s apparently long gone.

      Best of Luck, Chris and Carey.

      • Robobot says:

        @Quietly: Doh! That comment above was meant as a reply to someone’s question below; not so sure how I managed to screw that up.

        Just to be a little on topic: Their pot humor is cute in a high school way, but overall the Jezebel editors are mediocre on their good days. Seeing them coming out better than Consumerist in all this is pretty infuriating.

  34. Shadowfire says:

    Chris, Carey… good luck to you both.

    I’m saddened that Kotaku is such a large part of this company’s success. The site’s contributors are often terrible.. :(

  35. eightfifteen says:

    Something I have never understood, and perhaps I’m just ignorant, but the one thing that drives people to media site, content, is the first thing that usually gets cut via cutting the people that gather the content. Same thing can be seen with newspapers, magazines, etc.

    Instead of cutting costs by eliminating people, perhaps pursuing new revenue streams for consumerist would be a better route. A sponsored weekly podcast? When a company gets some good press here, offer them a premium “Gold Medal of Service” ad spot. Just some ides off the top of my head.

    Sorry for the layoffs. Maybe you can be two of the 10 new hires? Otherwise, best of luck.

  36. Sean Salisbury Steak says:

    Wow this sucks. Best of luck to both Chris and CGB going forward.

    Maybe they can start their own blog to compete (something like the Customerian?) and if they do well enough, there will be a buyout/merger and all will be one again! :)

    But then again…

  37. homerjay says:

    I guess its easy for commenters like myself to forget that this is actually a business and you guys get paid for this. It’s a shame and I’m certainly sorry to see you guys go.
    I guess since you’re in the city you can take a stroll down to Wall Street and punch anyone wearing a suit right in the face. Maybe that’ll make you feel better?

  38. ElizabethD says:

    Awww, I’m so sorry, Carey and Chris. You guys are very talented and I’ve enjoyed your “voices” as blog contributors. (And sorry that you and Meg are left on your own, Ben.)

    Tell Nick that this is the *only* Gawker-owned blog that I read every single day; heck, I practically read it every hour on weekdays. I used to be a Gawker.com and Defamer.com regular, but haven’t looked at either in nearly a year. Jezebel I only visit when it’s linked here.

    Bummer, man. :-(

  39. Notsewfast says:

    The funny thing is that I assumed that Lifehacker would be one of the least profitable sites due to the fact that almost every user on the site uses adblock and it seems (to me at least) to have a pretty niche appeal.

    Consumerist always seemed like it was probably 4th in line after Gawker, Giz, and Koataku.

    Sorry to hear that guys. I think Gawker media has ditched some of its real value for the purpose of maximizing revenue (Most recently the spin-off of Wonkette.)

  40. Khuluna says:

    Aw…That’s sad. There aren’t enough people working on Gizmodo as it is? I have to refresh the first page every 10 minutes just to keep up as it is. Same-ish with lifehacker. This is a sad sad day. D:

  41. DrGirlfriend says:

    This is a real bummer, and I have to say I’m surprised that Consumerist was chosen as one of the sites in which to make cuts.

    Best of luck to Carey and Chris.

  42. UbadahCabbash says:

    That’s okay, I’ll just stop visiting Gizmodo, Kotaku, and Lifehacker to make up for it.

    And as far as the properties such as Jezebel, io9, Deadspin and Jalopnik (and Gawker, which I’ve never even heard of) which are poised to join them, None of these have any appeal to me. So good for your parent company! Wise choices!

  43. chicagocooper says:

    Consumerist is the backbone of Gawker. I know the fortune 500 doesn’t want to advertise on the same site they get bashed. There has to be a market for the top companies to recruit the bitter ex-customers of there competition. Oh… wait… there is one, it’s the consumerist. You need a better marketing department, not cuts.

  44. navstar says:

    What are the most popular Gawker sites??

    • Robobot says:

      @navstar: Every Gawker site has a Sitemeter icon on the lower left of the screen. It is located left and down a little from the links to the archives, about, advertising, etc. pages. You can check out page view stats there.

      Back in the days of yee olde Gawker Media I think they actually had some sort of comparison chart between the blogs.

      (I stupidly posted this as a reply to someone else earlier, sorry!)

  45. WEGGLES90 says:

    If I disable ad-block-plus for the consumerist, can they come back? :(

  46. Anonymously says:

    Cutting 19 and hiring 10 new ones? Seems like they’re using this as an excuse to fire some people under the guise of a layoff. Jezebel, io9, Deadspin and Jalopnik hold no interest to me, so it sucks to hear that resources are being shifted from Consumerist to them.

  47. novacthall says:

    Wishing you both the best in your future endeavors. I have full confidence you’ll both land on your feet.

  48. haimtime says:

    We will miss everyone. I think Nick Denton should reconsider. I would love a roundup of all the good stuff those two did over their tenure.

    They should start up their own site, and prove everyone wrong.

  49. kathyl says:

    There’s only two other Gawker sites I regularly keep up with, Kotaku and io9. I’ve recently been disappointed with the quality of reporting on Kotaku and actually just yesterday removed it from my feed reader. io9 I was initially excited to find, and now have been turned off by the negativity I feel is in the writing of most of the editors there. I really only keep an eye out for spoilers, and skip the rest as the tone is so negative.

    I’ll still keep reading the Consumerist because I think the work being done here is good, and while it will suffer with the staff cut in half (two people can’t do the work of four, especially the caliber of work we nearly always see here) I believe it will still be important to read. It’s just a shame that the most valuable, as I see it, of the Gawker sites is the one getting cut in half.

    I will, however, stop reading Kotaku and io9 entirely…half in protest and half because I really wasn’t enjoying the content on either anymore.

    Condolences to the staffers leaving (hopefully for greener pastures) and best wishes for the two staying to handle the workload as well as they can given the circumstances.

  50. closed_account says:

    yea am I partially at fault? I was going to ask where the ads were on consumerist and then remembered that I haven’t seen an ad in ages (thanks adblock plus). I for one would be willing to “donate” my share (I feel $12 for the year is good) just so I don’t feel bad. I don’t know….. everything just sucks right now! (PS I turned adblock off and clicked some ads to help out right now) best wishes guys

  51. To keep my job I’m also cutting my procrastination time, so less Consumerist. Damn economy.

  52. ChChChacos says:

    :( i send my sympathy. that is sad.

  53. cinlouwho says:

    This is too bad. Uh, I never visit the other sites that have been mentioned. I only visit the Consumerist and have recommended it to everyone! Perhaps you should break it off from the other sites and make it a non profit with donations?

  54. RonDiaz says:

    Very lame, very lame indeed.

    I suppose this is an opportunity for a competitor though, as Consumerist will be significantly weakened.

  55. brettt says:

    *UNSUBSCRIBE*

  56. mizj says:

    I’m sorry to hear this. I hope things get better soon. I love this site – I check in several times a day, so please know that you’re all doing great work.

  57. I suspect that Captain Duvel Moneycat had something to do with this.

  58. jml999 says:

    Just my 2 cents. Consumerist is the first Gawker site I encountered and without fail the best. I would have never encountered any of the others if it weren’t from them. In these tough economic times, removing any resources from them is ludicrous given the sites content. You all are robbing Peter to pay Paul. Nick – try taking a pay cut dude instead of throwing two seasoned employees out on their @$$es. It seems to me this is a move out of the Circuit City playbook – fire the experienced employees so you can line the pockets… ring a bell? Sad.

    As I am sure my email certainly won’t turn anything around – those of you getting let go best of luck and please hit the ground running.

  59. ryaninc says:

    This really sucks. I agree that Consumerist is the best of the Gawker sites, with Gizmodo and Lifehacker being second. What about closing/shrinking the sites that have the least pageviews? I can’t possibly imagine that Jalopnik or Fleshbot do better than Consumerist…

  60. aurf says:

    I’m really sorry to hear this guys. I hope you have good luck in the job market and get new gigs nice and fast. :(

  61. brettt says:

    I should elaborate on my own statement that I am unsubscribing in protest:

    It is beyond hypocritical for Gawker to do this to Consumerist, considering the point of the blog. They are firing 19 people who supposedly did nothing wrong, and are hiring 10 new people. Circuit City, anyone? And giving everyone raises(!!!???!!!) And firing people from the blog because it’s not as commercially successful as another? Do Gawker even know what the blog is about, let alone read it? Maybe they should start charging people to read articles, or charge layout fees, word fees, writer fees, and baggage fees to the readers, a la United Airlines.

    And blaming the economy. Really? Did the grocery store shrink ray turn on the Consumerist out of vengeance for bringing it’s existence to light? Maybe Gawker should charge more for their ad space, or move writers around rather than drop them. It’s called LOYALTY.

    And I can’t really read a blog about protecting people from large evil companies when it’s RUN BY ONE.

  62. mzs says:

    That was long, but I bet the real reason is that it is very hard to sell advertising on a site that honestly describes the bad of those same potential clients. If consumerist changes for the worse, where will I turn to for advice in these areas. No other site risks posts like these precisely because they are worried about their ad income.

  63. This is THE SUCK

    I read the other sites ONLY when they get linked from here. I already sent my politely worded email to Nick.

  64. Oh, and yeah More than good luck to Carey and Chris. I feel like you guys are part of each and every one of my days :(

    You will be missed!

    /tearyeyes

  65. warf0x0r says:

    You should to companies you’ve never had to review and tell them they can buy a

    insert name, has never had an article on consumerist!

    There’d be like 5 whole companies right there!

  66. Banned in DC says:

    Dumb decision. When you run a website that pulls no punches when taking companies to task for bad decisions, you can’t expect to live on ad revenue from said companies. Why should the big ticket corporations pay to be beat up on Consumerist? You have to subsidize it to keep conflicts of interest low.

    On a side note, I only have one bookmark link to all the Gawker media sites: Consumerist.com. I do visit Jalopnik, Gizmodo, and Lifehacker, but I hit all of them from the sidebar links on Consumerist. If this site gets bad enough that I stop visiting, then consider all the other sites I mentioned off my bookmarks.

  67. ditchell says:

    I never post here, but read regularly

    I’m not going to tell Nick Denton how to… aw hell why not?

    Nick, you’re gutting the best (and easily most respected) of the lot. Does Gizmodo and Kotaku really need more writers at the expense of the Consumerist being 2 people now?

    I guess so. If you hadn’t thrown in that line about adding more people elsewhere, you’d have me. But in the years I’ve read Lifehacker, Kotaku, Gizmodo I’ve never thought “Man I wish there were more posts!”. Cause there’s plenty.

  68. MercuryPDX says:

    For those of you wondering how to diasble adblock just for Consumerist:

    In FF:
    1. Under Tools select “Adblock Plus…”
    2. Click “Add Filter”.
    3. In the form box type: @@|http://consumerist.com/
    4. Click OK, then start clicking ads. :)

  69. misanthropic777 says:

    So let me get this straight: due to the national financial situation gawker media is cutting staff on the one blog that talks about financial matters? How does that make any sense at all?

  70. PrescottDawidude says:

    So sorry to hear this news. And I, too, am very surprised that Consumerist is not the top blog on the Gawker network. Not even in the top 5??? This is one of the most intelligent blogs on the internet, and it’s the only one where the comments are as informative & interesting as the articles themselves–all without tyrannical moderating.

    I have to say that I am impressed with the announcement email, though. Even though he knew it would be leaked (I love the last line granting permission), it was detailed, thoughtful, & respectful. I was very much expecting something like, “Choose those members of your team to be terminated. They will have 10 minutes to clear out their desks and will be escorted out of the building by armed officers.”

  71. RadcliffeDuge says:

    It is not about making profit, it is about survival. Sometimes just to cut costs, it is necessary for a company to do so. When money comes pouring in, hiring seems to be the best decision. Once profit seems to be decreasing more and more, layoffs bound to happen.

    Hard decision, but it may be a good decision for the company in the long run.

  72. Tijil says:

    Sad to see you go, Carey and Chris. You were valuable assets to Consumerist and in turn to ALL Gawker properties.

    Consumerist may not be the most profitable of the sites, but is likely the most respected of the Gawker lot, and that is directly due to the folks who work here.

    Hey! Nick! Listen up!

    If you haven’t done it yet, you need to get rid of Richard Blakeley the idiot behind Gizmodo’s TV-turnoff “stunt” at CES who was banned from attending the show…

    He directly cost people money and time at what could easily have been once-in-a-lifetime opportunities for them personally and their companies.

    Blakeley needs to go first, not the good folks here at Consumerist.

  73. elisa says:

    I, too, started reading Gawker blogs only because of Consumerist. I’ve been reading Consumerist since its early days (with the Dick Tracy theme), and now I hit up Consumerist and Jezebel on a regular basis, with occasional stops at Lifehacker, Gawker, even Jalopnik and io9. Without Consumerist, I would never have heard of these other blogs.

  74. vildechaia says:

    Nick Denton: shame on you.

  75. mir777 says:

    This sucks a great deal – I’m so sorry. Consumerist is on its own a fine and informative site; and moreover serves as a gateway to the other, allegedly more ‘profitable’ sites. I don’t agree with the slashing and restaffing (that won’t be redeployment – which is silly – a good writer is a good writer).

    If you’re seeking donations or weekend warriors to volunteer please don’t hesitate to ask.

  76. elisa says:

    Here’s the link to the Gawker post on this by Nick Denton:
    [gawker.com]

    They’re also letting Moe go on Jezebel, she’s also one of my favorite writers…

  77. trujunglist says:

    I’m sorry =(

    Honestly, I think this is one of the best sites on the ‘net. What the hell? I understand that they want Gizmodo, Kotaku, and Jalopnik to be highly profitable, but I can’t see how the Consumerist isn’t part of that. They get about as many front page Diggs as any Gizmodo article does, and the thing about the Gizmodo articles is that usually they’re just a repeat of some other previously posted news. Most of the content on Consumerist is completely unique! It’s not like there’s an Engadget-style competitor….
    Argh, I’m becoming more disillusioned daily, and I didn’t think it was even possible after all that’s happened in recent times.

  78. bigtimestuff says:

    Bummer, Carey and Chris. You will be missed! I hope you find amazing new jobs.

  79. Kia says:

    Sigh. This is pretty damn weak. I love a lot of Gawker sites, but the Consumerist is always one I turn too first each day, and each time I check my feeds. Of all people to cut. They should have scrapped that trashy Fleshbot!

    • Ereshkigal234 says:

      @Kia: i agree completely with that remark. Consumerist is the first news i read in the day and only one i keep up with every week. There are so many other things they could cut.

    • freshwater says:

      @Kia:

      +1

      I’ll miss you Chris and Carey.

      I hope this isn’t the beginning of suck for gawker. I never looked at any of the others until I found Consumerist.

  80. Vicky says:

    I understand the intention of those who want to disable Adblock just for Consumerist, but I frankly have to stand by my principles on this. If I can rail against the entertainment industry for not adapting to market conditions, I can call out a media network for relying on a kind of advertising that has been blocked by a wide audience for at least 3 years. I don’t have an answer for you, and I really feel for you guys, but Adblock stays where it is.

  81. chas7926 says:

    This has already been said many times, but I want to add my voice to it. I would not have found any Gawker site if not for Consumerist, and firing 19 people to hire 10 new people seems a little questionable to me.

  82. aka_bigred says:

    What are your boss’ email addresses? I think it’s time all of us consumerists united with an EECB to show them they are doing the wrong thing.

  83. crazypants says:

    I’d also like to point out that if Consumerist will not be updated as often, Gawker will be losing *alot* of pageviews from me, as I typically visit consumerist.com multiple times throughout my work day and over the weekend to read the new posts.

    I’m also going to be less inclined to visit the other sites in the Gawker network that the Consumerist resources are being funneled to out of sheer protest/spite for this decision.

    Furthermore, I for one have lost a lot of respect for for the Gawker network in the past couple hours since this decision was announced.

  84. stryker1800 says:

    im not sure what exactly his reasons are for cutting in one place and hiring in another as far as the business model goes, but i understand the point is to protect your business like anyone in his position would do and hopefully hes doing his best to keep his integrity in tack but on the not of people bashing kotaku for its editors im not seeing what your problem with them is, every gawker writer puts their own opinion in their writing somewhere i mean we are reading blogs after all.

  85. MPHinPgh says:

    This is truly sad news. Carey and Chris, I wish you both the best of luck. I’ll be sorry to see you go.

  86. crazypants says:

    One more thing to add:

    This is a huge mistake in light of the crazy financial times were in at the moment, if anything Gawker should be contributing additional resources to the Consumerist, and possibly even starting up a hardcore financial/stock market based blog as well. (Stockhacker!)

    The turbulent financial times are of great interest to myself and a LOT of other Americans right now, who typically wouldn’t care about the economy quite so much – now that there is a recession on, I find myself much more inclined to visit financial related news posts than ever before.

    Gosh darnnit Gawker, you should be taking advantage of this trend and not stifling it!@#$%^%^

  87. lotusangel42 says:

    wow, this makes me very, very sad. Like many others, I would never have come across the other Gawker sites if not for Consumerist. Now, I regularly browse through some of them, without even blocking ads! I truly hope that these cuts are reconsidered.
    Carey and Chris, I really hope that things work out for you guys!

  88. Nick Denton says:

    @undefined: Hey, yes, it has proven hard to sell advertising on Consumerist. Though we never expected it would be that appealing to marketers. As for finding people jobs elsewhere in the organization, yes, we’re trying to do that in a couple of cases. Looks like Dash from Fleshbot will move over to Deadspin, for instance.

    • maztec says:

      @Nick Denton: You consider that some of us actually continue to read your other properties, because of Consumerist? It drives me over to them and keeps me engaged with other Gawker property. Maybe I am the only one of that sort.

  89. Ein2015 says:

    @Nick Denton: Thanks :)

    Sorry if the post was a bit… harsh… just normal Consumerist “hate-the-man” type language I suppose.

    I just don’t want this site to go away… I love clicking refresh too much! :P

  90. maztec says:

    Translation: “Because we are unable to keep our profits going up every year and instead may not be as profitable as last year, but will still be profitable, we are going to get rid of some of the hardest workers.”

    Between the Lines: “If they had posted more blatantly sexist articles and images of naked women, e.g. Gizmodo, they may be able to keep their staff members. However, their appeal is minimal since disgruntled consumers are unlikely to click on links.”

    Analysis: Not all sites lead directly to profit. Indirect profit is common and useful. I visit many of the Gawker sites as a package, partially because of the Consumerist. As it is, I will be re-evaluating my use of the other blogs and seeing what alternative properties from other sources are available. Preferably sources that I do not have to play the, “Is there going to be suddenly something NSFW on my reader” while in Public.

    Sorry to hear this Ben, best of luck – and do not let them shut the Consumerist down!

  91. razremytuxbuddy says:

    This is the only Gawker site I even look at, and I look at Consumerist several times a day. It provides a true, unique service to the public. I can hear Best Buy, Walmart, Sears, Countrywide and Comcast all high-fiving each other right now. There ought to be a way to make Consumerist self-supporting, without turning it into one of the bad guys it reports on.

    Carey and Chris, you are both class acts. I’ll miss your weekend stories. You could start your own Consumerist-like site, you know. If you do, I’ll be a regular visitor.

  92. orlo says:

    I particularly like this part: “advertising sales are up by about 30% on their level of a year ago”

    Ironic that this site is run like a ruthless corporation. Maybe it’s all a trick to lull into complacency.

  93. HogwartsAlum says:

    Aww, man, I’m sorry. That blows. I really like this site and I’ve enjoyed their work very much.

    Good luck to Chris and Carey.

  94. juri squared says:

    Booo, this is my favorite Gawker site and the only one I read daily. I’ll miss Carey and Chris!

  95. esthermofet says:

    Wait — 19 of 133? Dude, I totally thought Consumerist was run by three guys out of their basement.

  96. purplesun says:

    Well. That’s bull. Blaming it on the poor economy? Big steaming pile of bull.

    Guess I won’t be checking this site more than once a week now, if that.

    Good job, Nick!

  97. LeoSolaris says:

    Consumerist is the only one of the Gawker sites I use, and to tell ya the truth, will probably ever use. I know I am still fairly recent to the site, but I am still sorry to see you two go.

    I wish you both the very best!

  98. adamkantor says:

    I was anti-Gawker for the longest time (because Kotaku pissed me off) and it was the Consumerist that brought me back. I found replacements for all the sites I used to visit here and if it weren’t for the Consumerist I’d probably still be reading Joystiq and Engadget exclusively.

    PS. based on the graph I can see why jobs are being cut [advertising.gawker.com]
    Up is bad right?

  99. AbiraHizer says:

    This sucks, I love the Consumerist! You should get TONS of bonuses!

  100. jonworld says:

    That really sucks, big time. Chris and Carey, it seems to me, have made huge contributions to this amazing blog and it is terrible to see them go. Good luck, guys.

  101. zsouthboy says:

    I can only echo the comments of people saying that if it weren’t for Consumerist, I would’ve never gone to Kotaku or Gizmodo – I’m in the key demographic for both.

    It’s a bit of a douchebag move, not giving us, the readers, the option to support the site by selling something like “Consumerist Premium Subscriptions” for $60 a year, or something like that.

    Yeah, remember us, the readers? We’re coming here to talk about supporting companies that make good moves and treat their customers (us) and employees (you guys) with respect, and products that don’t suck (your stories, comments, guides, help).

  102. mac-phisto says:

    so let me get this straight. we’re doing well…blah, blah, blah…making lots of money…blah, blah, blah…readership up…blah, blah, blah…hiring new folks…blah, blah, blah…you’re fired.

    wow nick, you’re a douchebag.

    can we get a ‘how to eecb gawker’? no? WTF am i going to read on the weekends now?

  103. zsouthboy says:

    @Ben Popken:

    Having worked with Adwords a ton, I’d like to point out that this is a BAD idea.

    Clicks without conversions mean problems.

    What Ben means to say is to click the google ads AND purchase something as a result of that click (part of the same session, so that it’s tracked and Consumerist/Gawker gets credit).

  104. shufflemoomin says:

    All the best to the staff being let go. Is it just me or is this bad economy thing being used as an excuse for cost cutting all round? Why is it just the US? Why aren’t we experiencing this hard hitting finaance crap in Europe? And how would the economy directly affect a blog site? I’ll try avoid pointing out the irony of a consumer and financial advice blog being affected by financial crises caused by bad consumers…

  105. emona says:

    I wrinkled my nose when I realized Gawker owned Consumerist. I don’t read (or particularly like, as I’ve tried them all but that new one) any other Gawker Media site, except Jezebel… and even that site started to suck about three months ago when the new writers flooded in.

    Piss on them. Chris and Carey are brilliant, funny guys with a very readable writing style. So, so sorry to see you go. I’d give you a :( but that doesn’t fully express my feelings.

    Perhaps a >:( is more suitable.

  106. wellfleet says:

    shit. we’re hurting at Best Buy, too. no sarcasm. your quest for truth and knowledge will be missed. keep writing.

  107. crazypants says:

    @Ben Popken: Last I checked it was against Google Adsense’s TOS to actively promote your userbase to click the ads on your own website all willy nilly like.

    Not quite sure that you promoting that is the wisest of all possible decisions to make at this point…

  108. lucidpsyche says:

    I’m so sorry to hear about this — it’s horrible. I thought blogs were supposed to be the modern-day answer to newspapers? With announcements like these, Gawker is becoming just like the other “old media” companies. Profits not increasing as much as they should? Lay off half the staff. :(

  109. ogunther says:

    The Consumerist is by far my favorite written publication of any kind and the only site I make sure to read every day, without fail.

    There are many reasons for my devotion to The Consumerist, though mostly it has to do with the fact that this site has kept me informed of issues I care about and helped expose me to countless others. I’ve learned more about personal and world financial issues and solutions though this site and the information it makes available than all other sources combined; I’ve become a smarter, better informed and empowered consumer; I’ve laughed, yelled and damn nearly cried at some of the outrageous subjects covered within these pages; and I’ve shared my love of this site with everyone that I care about. Many of them have become devoted readers as well.

    I know this is not the death knell of The Consumerist however I can’t help but feel a great sense of disappointment and sadness that one of the most important sites we have is suffering such a travesty.

    I wish Carey and Chris the best and hope that they realize what a positive impact their work has made on peoples’ lives. Here’s to you and the hope that you land on your feet and find yourselves in better times.

  110. DoktorGoku says:

    That’s really unfortunate- this is, by far, my favorite Gawker site. I found it through Kotaku, and have since stopped reading Kotaku (I don’t feel it has enough substance).

    I hope that Nick Denton does the right thing and helps find new positions elsewhere for those who are being laid off.

  111. IrvCrapper says:

    Good think you got lots of people to vet comments, disemvowel people, and shut off comment access.

    Seems like a smart trade – a smart business move to me.

    Good thing Consumerist is in the position of critiquing the business practices of others.

    Peace.

    • razremytuxbuddy says:

      @IrvCrapper: Thanks for mentioning the vetters and disemvowelers. They do seem to be the most arbitrary, unenlightened and therefore expendable of the writers.

      I’m starting to think Gawker has never heard of a loss leader. I’m guessing they are about to see what happens when a loss leader such as Consumerist, which brings boatloads of new subscribers to Gawker, is underestimated.

      • IrvCrapper says:

        @razremytuxbuddy:
        Sometimes I link over to the other sites, but I have never had the desire to originate at Gawker through Jalopnik.

        In fact, for the newly initiated, the whole Gawker interwoven network of blogs if puzzling.

        Anyway, I come here much less often now.

  112. spidra says:

    Sucks. As Phydeaux says, I can think of some editors/writers at other Gawker properties who are far more deserving of a pink slip.

  113. Snarkysnake says:

    I’m kinda put out that we readers (and posters) are just looked at as “disgruntled consumers”… There is some serious information sharing on these pages. I may not agree with everyone,every time,but I learn a hell of a lot from looking in two,three times a day.The deep thinkers at Gawker surely must know that a site like this could never attract enough national ad traffic to be profitable- It’s just too freewheeling and …Dangerous. GM ,for instance, won’t buy ads on a site that might tell the truth about their crappy cars. Ditto any other companies witha line of bullshit to spin.

    Carey, Chris,lets not get all maudlin here. You’re flickering on and off these pages over the next couple of weeks,but I ,for one, will search you out wherever you end up. Godspeed …

    • IrvCrapper says:

      @Snarkysnake:

      This should be a subscription service. It would probably be the only site I’d pay for access to.

      Like Consumer Reports, I would WANT to know that it isn’t influenced or biased by its underwriters.

      • Tijil says:

        @IrvCrapper: Actually a good idea, Crapper. :)

        Having an optional Premium subscription level of service here at Consumerist (even though I don’t know what features would be free, and what premium) would possibly be a decent way to help fund a site that is too dangerous for most advertisers to consider advertising on.

        Hopefully someone will consider that as an actual, serious suggestion.

  114. Red_Eye says:

    Sorry to hear this ben, I know what its like to work for a company who treats their employess as pawns rather than assets

  115. Quilt says:

    Reality sucks.

  116. Red_Eye says:

    Ive seen it suggested the two laid off personnel start their own site. While I cant offer something that will pay them anything I’d be willing to set them up with whatever software they want on unlimitedbs.com and unlimitedbullshit.com for them to start their own endeavor. they can contact me at csoffer at pcsites dot com.

  117. chatterboxwriting says:

    @Ben Popken: Yes, definitely don’t solicit ad clicks. Google will disable your account AND keep all of the money accumulated in it. So if you’ve accumulated $20K since your last payment from Google, and they shut your account down, you’re out the whole $20K!

  118. BOOOOOO!!!!!!

    HISSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

    The Consumerist is one of the best examples of what the internet can do to help people if applied properly.

    I hope that Ben and Meghann keep up the good work apart from Gawker, but hey- we readers of The Consumerist know you gotta pay dem bills too.

    Carey and Chris will definitely be missed but voices such as theirs can’t be kept down for long.

    Sorry to hear about this, wish you guys the best.

  119. Trae says:

    The only reason I started reading any Gawker blogs was because I loved the Consumerist.

    This sucks. Yes, I understand why it has to happen… but it still sucks.

  120. ViperBorg says:

    Ouch. That’s really sad to hear. Chris, Carey, Good luck, and Godspeed.

  121. breny says:

    I’m pissed. EECB sent.

  122. bluewyvern says:

    This is sad news, and I’m sorry for those who have to go.

    So, Consumerist is popular but doesn’t bring in the ad revenue, huh? I guess Consumerist readers don’t impulse buy a bunch of stuff they don’t need…

  123. flowerofhighrank says:

    aw, man. It’s bad enough when it’s any website…but when it’s a website that’s so good, it’s worse. Good luck to you both! Why won’t Gawker start a blog about FOOD?

  124. elisa says:

    Let’s make this post tops in terms of pageviews. Since pageview bonuses still count for this year. Here’s to you Ben!

    And drive up the pageviews of Chris and Carey’s last posts these 2 weeks too.

    And, ditto on the “disgruntled consumers.” This site isn’t JUST about that. I’ve been lucky enough to be treated relatively well by companies, but I still check Consumerist on the daily. Why? b/c of the helpful tips & roundups, the news links that I might otherwise have missed, the helpfulness of many of my fellow commenters. Oftentimes the comments are more helpful than the posts! I’ll miss having so many posts to dip into. And the lessening of links will def. mean less looking at other Gawker properties.

  125. YeshayaMule says:

    I have to say. Its sad to hear this. I do read other gawker sites. But this site just feels… the most honest. Which is the whole point of it.
    I read this site daily. I tell my staff to read this blog daily. I am in the customer service business and this place is such an amazing resource.
    Its ashame to see it reduced, when I already wish there were MORE stories.
    Good luck Carey and Chris. You have done a great job here.

  126. Hoss says:

    Definetely the wrong cuts and a piss poor gdby

  127. Wubbytoes says:

    That totally sucks. I’ll miss you guys, but good luck with whatever comes next.

  128. AmericaTheBrave says:

    This is a dumb move by the Gawker higher-ups. Of all the Gawker sites, The Consumerist is the only one I visit on a daily basis. The other sites I rarely visit more than once or twice a year.

  129. azntg says:

    @Trae: Agree with you there.

    I really think that the Gawker Group is shooting themselves on the foot with this decision.

    There is no substitute for class and quality. Surely, you’d think, that in a chain of blogs, you’d always have a money maker and a money loser. The loser gets the people in the door and the money maker gets the people to stay. It’s an interdependent chain.

    But, in a way, I’m not too surprised by Mr. Denton’s decisions. I’ve already found out for myself (the hard way) of his modus operandi over a period of brush-ins at commenting in his articles over at Gawker: his site, his rules; absolutely no mercy if he disagrees with you (or if it interferes with potential revenue, I suspect).

    Sorry to hear that you are being forced out, Chris and Carey.

    Many a times have I’ve seen (as I’m sure you’ve all seen) people saying “Slow News Day?,” “This has been posted before” and the like (moreso before the Commenting Code was enacted). Your editorial talents and propensity for sharing interesting articles will be missed.

  130. missdona says:

    So sad…. my best to you, Carey and Chris.

  131. SacraBos says:

    Consumerist is the one I read first, then the others later (io9 is getting pretty good). I understand their position, and at least Nick does blame himself. After all, without revenue, you can’t pay staff at all.

    Best of luck to the departing editors, your followers will miss you. And hopefully, follow you to you new destination(s).

  132. Keter says:

    Suckolus maximus.

    Liss’n up Nick D. and Gawker krewe, here is feedback:

    Of your sites, Lifehacker drew me in, and I’ve been reading Consumerist from Day 1. Of Gawker sites, I regularly read (and re-blog as links) only Consumerist and Lifehacker. You cut a demographically main sequence site IN HALF with this dumb, dumb move. I really thought y’all had more of a clue than this. Ever heard of a loss leader? I’d never venture onto Gizmodo, Kotaku, Gawker, Jezebel, io9, Deadspin or Jalopnik without the crosslinks from Consumerist and Lifehacker – they just don’t have enough content that interests me to budget the reading time as I do for Consumerist and Lifehacker.

    Good luck Carey and Chris, hopefully you’ll find greener pastures. Hang in there Ben and Meghann. Maybe I’ll write something else for y’all like the how-to-buy-a-car thing. ;o)

  133. kusine says:

    So sad. Consumerist actually gives me useful information I can use everyday, as opposed to the other Gawker sites, which I only read because of Consumerist.

    Good luck, guys.

  134. breny says:

    Bad, bad business decision, Nick. Have you learned nothing from reading Consumerist?

    I’ll not be visiting any other Gawker sites besides this one anymore.

  135. TheCheez says:

    Consumerist touches a strong niche that is going to get bigger as the economy gets crappier. It’s really a shame Gawker doesn’t see that.

    I’ve been reading quite awhile and I see the daily posts on Consumerist increase more and more thanks in part to the folks you’re laying off. The busier this site gets the more I visit and that’s the bottom line.

    Letting writers go, especially when you’re still showing a profit is a slap in the face both to your writers and your readers.

  136. 11hawkinst says:

    This really sucks. Consumerist is one of the best blogs and one of the only blogs of its kind out on the internet right now. I really hope nothing worse will happen to you guys. Errr… I’m not liking this!

  137. OttoCulver says:

    So, you’re going to lay off 19 people and use the savings to increase base pay and hire 10 new people, yet at the same time you heap tons of praise on the 19 people you’re laying off? If the folks to be laid off are so good, then why not transition some of them to the other publications? This smacks of the same kind of bullshit as the Circuit City fiasco you’ve been reporting on. I feel for the folks who are being let go as part of this “cost saving” measure.

  138. mechfluff says:

    I am an avid reader of consumerist although I don’t comment here much. This is seriously the first thing that I check every morning after my gmail.

    I discovered consumerist through gizmodo, but I have since lost interest in reading every post on giz as consumerist tends to lend itself to quality posts that are all well worth reading.

    This is a wonderful site that has taught me plenty and kept me well informed. It saddens me that my favorite gawker site will be scaling back its operations and I wish the best for the writers that will be leaving the consumerist.

  139. banmojo says:

    damn, maybe you can get some of that bailout cash.

    my brother was making the point that as America walks headlong into socialism jobs will get cut left and right – free market and dog eat dog mentality is how humans work best – reward for hard work, long hours, vs giving everyone a free ride.

    does everyone, EVERYONE, deserve ‘free’ health care (it’s not f$#@ing free – nothing is f4#@ing free for f$#@’s sake)???

    who’s gonna pay for it?
    when obama raises taxes, many ‘rich’ people are gonna start doing some shit for themselves – wash their own car, do their own laundry, etc etc and this is just a small example of the trickle down effect in play. those will equal JOBS LOST.

    Me, I’m gonna vote for the lesser of two evils. And thank God for my faith in God’s will being behind all this history in the making.

    • IrvCrapper says:

      @banmojo:
      What?

      Free health care? No one is proposing that.

      Rewarding work? GDP doubles in US and worker pay declines. Who are you really concerned with?

      Raising taxes is harmful? Bush had taxes reduced every year he was in office, and look at the mess we are in.

    • katieoh says:

      @banmojo: i’m 99% sure that tax cuts won’t put the rich in the poor-house. it’s not like they’re taking it all away. they have more than enough to give.

      plus, i dunno, if i were rich, i would be willing to pony up some more for those less fortunate than i. just goes to show how asshole-ish some of the “have mores” can be.

  140. legwork says:

    Could Consumerist spin off and become subscriber funded ala consumers union? There’s something of a conflict if the money is coming from a larger organization that is itself beholden to advertisers. Is Nick coming under pressure for the affiliation?

  141. endless says:

    I am tempted to just read winding road and autoblog instead of jalopnik and engadget instead of gizmodo.

    not my preferences, but you don’t fuck with the consumerist! best wishes to the departed

  142. APowerCosmic says:

    If Nick says part of this is his fault, why isn’t he stepping down too? Seems to me if he feels he is at fault for the current problems in whole or in part, he should be the one to take it for the team as one of the guys leaving for the “good of the company.” Carey and Chris did and do great work, I have no doubt they’ll have plenty of offers from companies whom apparently have people at the helm who know how to plan.

  143. 3drage says:

    It doesn’t seem like any of the other sites are cutting staff, why Consumerist? Maybe they just aren’t announcing it. You’re the whole reason I started reading through the other blogs, sad to see that you guys will be hobbled so. :(

  144. SuchiraCormorant says:

    Your boss is a total tool, making wide sweeping business decisions based on the boogey man. It’s one thing to curtail costs in the light of a downturn in revenue, but you guys are profitable. I think the true dickhead-ness of the letter is the way he tries to be all self deprecating because “you can’t call me a prick, if I call myself one first”. The truth of the matter is that your company is firing people to increase profit and blaming that choice on perceived impacts on the market. Look, no one knows what the market will do and to use it as an excuse without evidence is disingenuous to anyone who slung words for your company. Long story short, you work for a cock knobbler. It’d be in your interest to find work elsewhere, else, who knows, the next staff reduction might be the result of a bad palm reader, or astrology chart gone amiss.

  145. Crazytree says:

    sploid was the best site on the entire gawker network.

  146. IndyJaws says:

    I’m not going to question Management, especially in these trying times. I’ll just thank Carey and Chris for their hard work and dedication to consumers everywhere during their tenure. I seriously hope that others have recognized their talents and will give them the opportunity they deserve. Best of luck to both of you.

    Greg

  147. jblack says:

    I’m really going to miss both of them.

    Why isn’t the title of this article “Consumerist profits up 30%; Celebrates by firing 50% of employees”.

  148. ageshin says:

    To fire 19, and then in the same breath hire 10 sounds strange to me. Perhaps they want to fire 19 people who are paid more, and hire 10 people at a lower wage. Since the consumerist is the only site of the Gawker group I use, I have no way of comparison. The Consumerist serves a useful service. Perhaps they should just fire 9, and work harder at making there sites more profitable. I have the deepest sympathy for those fired, for we all become poorer for it.

  149. scoosdad says:

    We are taking this seriously.

  150. Grrrrrrr, now with two buns made of bacon. says:

    That just plain sucks. Carey and Chris are awesome writers and I think your boss is making a big mistake.

    I’d personally like to stick a rabid Tasmanian Devil down Nick Denton’s trousers.

    First the sucky layout change (yes, Nick, it bites), and then this.

    Gawker management sucks.

  151. scarlin says:

    I’m sorry to hear that.
    I agree with TVarmy – donation link might be a good idea.

    I have this site in my iGoogle and I check it on a daily basis. One of only a handful of sites that I visit regularly. The advice, information, and stories are extremely helpful.

  152. shenanigrams says:

    while this blows like angie dickinson, the email from nick denton speaks a lot to the strengths of the Gawker organization: the same prescience in spotting publishing opportunities is now being applied to the realities of budgeting for business — investing in sites ahead of the curve and cutting costs ahead of the curve makes for an impressive combo.

    as we all know, the next few years will blow like… well… angie dickinson… or, more accurately, like Jaws from James Bond coupled with angie dickinson’s blowing stamina. am i making sense?

    i wish Chris and Carey the very best. and good luck to Ben and Meghann — I’m sure you’ll find an innovative way to keep the site as current, compelling, and often frustrating as it has been since day 1.

  153. seamer says:

    This is a perfect market with more and more stories seemingly written for sites like the Consumerist (hello Sears, hello Comcast, hello Wamu/Wachovia).

    Its hard to see the justification for downsizing when the market is booming.

  154. Damn, Chris and Carey did a great job, I’m sorry to see them go. Hopefully things turnaround quickly so The Consumerist can get then back before they land somewhere else.

  155. Meathamper says:

    I’m sorry. But you guys will know that as long as there’s a bunch of loyal readers behind you, you’re not going anywhere.

  156. nsv says:

    I’ll repeat it here: Consumerist is my gateway site. I start here and if I have time I skim Lifehacker, sometimes Gawker and Jalopnik, and if a Jezebel headline catches my eye I’ll click. But I’m here every day, and Consumerist is the one I found first.

    This sucks.

    And what’s up with firing some to hire others?

  157. WasabiJoe says:

    I’m so conflicted. I love Kotaku but I really hate that Consumerist is suffering since it’s not as “mainstream” as video games. I browse both sites religiously but I feel that Kotaku already has more than enough staff. If anything, Consumerist is the site that needs growth through new hires than the stronger properties.

  158. SKURRY says:

    Booo! I like Carey!

  159. no.no.notorious says:

    how about cutting all the staff at jezebel to save money?

    • RvLeshrac says:

      @no.no.notorious:

      Burn!

      But, yeah, I’ve never really understood what Jezebel has to offer anyone. With articles such as “Palin’s hairstylist revealed” and “Engineer needs fashion help,” they’re doing the exact same thing that Cosmo has been doing for the last ump-ty years – keeping women focused on how they look instead of how they act, think, and work.

      We have GQ, Maxim, Stuff, etc… women have Jezebel, Cosmo, Redbook, etc. Do the vapid and trendy really need outlets more than the ripped-off and harrassed? (The marketing says yes, but the economy says no. Perhaps if more attention were paid to sites like Consumerist, Motley Fool, Clark Howard, etc., we might not be in this mess.)

      I’m not arguing that the editors and writers at Jezebel aren’t GOOD at what they do (even though I think most of the articles are content-free, I can’t say that they’re poorly written), I’m simply arguing that they aren’t really offering anything new or interesting.

      Palin’s hair? Really? Wow, that’s an amazingly important subject. I’d personally rather discuss foreign policy and the state of the world NOW, and perhaps later discuss the candidates’ fashion sense. If we do those in the wrong order, we risk drinking our own filtered urine in a fallout shelter after someone gets a little upset that a foreign leader called them during naptime.

      I’m just sayin’…

    • elisa says:

      @no.no.notorious: I’d like to defend Jezebel. It and Consumerist are really the only Gawker sites I read on a regular basis.

      Yes, Jezebel has its share of “filler” items. But it also has some very thought-provoking pieces, and highlights issues that are important, beyond Palin’s hair. And that includes foreign policy and the state of the world now.

      And, besides all the serious stuff, it’s just plain fun to read. Much more fun than Redbook, Cosmo, etc. (Full disclosure: I don’t really read “women’s” magazines). In fact, in their Mag Hag columns, they poke fun at traditional women’s magazines. Jezebel is much more than your description of it, and it shouldn’t be dismissed so lightly.

      That said, maybe as a woman I can find more in Jezebel than you can. Just because you do not feel that Jezebel has much to offer does not mean that everyone agrees with you. Hey, I don’t find Kotaku or Jalopnik to be particularly useful or helpful – I mean, who cares about games or cars? Why not discuss foreign policy instead on those blogs? After all, those just cater to a male audience, not important at all…

      *Disclaimer: I don’t really think that Kotaku or Jalopnik should be cut, I just think that a comment like “let’s cut Jezebel” is not helpful and am responding in kind.

  160. Pithlit says:

    I hate this. Consumerist was the first Gawker site I ever went to, and it’s the first and only one I go to every day. Not good, Gawker. Best of luck, Carey and Chris.

  161. SKURRY says:

    BTW I ONLY visit consumerist! I don’t really care for the others. I would think there would be some people out there that would do “intern” work pro-bono on the weekends. Speaking of which… maybe check out my blog and see if I am that caliber.

  162. mcjake says:

    Sorry guys. This really sucks. My media company just went through this last month. Had me sick to my stomach for weeks.

  163. RvLeshrac says:

    For those who use adblocker/etc to block *all* ads, and not simply the annoying flash/javascript-based ads, you have only yourselves to blame.

    Ad-blocking will be he death of many sites. Not every website is supported by a large corporation, and the vast majority of non-branded websites rely on their pittance of ad revenue simply to keep sites going.

    Of course, most people don’t really care about that, they just want to be entertained for free.

  164. AnnabelleMaynooth says:

    I read Consumerist before reading the other sites, and sometimes, Consumerist exclusively. Defamer and Gawker often have mirror posts and just salacious information, but Consumerist is USEFUL!

  165. Darren W. says:

    By the way, who IS responsible for marketing at Consumerist? There MUST be related businesses that can benefit from advertising here. Consumer Reports? The Above and Beyond companies? Do Credit Unions advertise? Debt consolidation companies maybe? It can’t be THAT hard to find companies who make a profit from sticking it to the bigger guys.

  166. lunarcore says:

    Loved Kotaku for years, and I avoid the competition now. The quality is in the commenters. I never really thought they needed more help. Weekends are light, but the big game news rarely happends during weekends.

  167. Xkeeper says:

    This is disappointing beyond belief.

    Consumerst is where I started, and it’s still the only page I visit here daily. Does Kotaku/etc really need more staff? It seems more than adequate as it is.

  168. SparklyJ says:

    nick@gawker.com

    HIT HIM, PEOPLE! Here’s my letter, now everyone join in and EECB the Gawker peeps.

    After you’ve done that, take a little while to go back through the site and click on every story of Chris and Carey’s. Hell, click on them all, Ben and Meg deserve a fat bonus, too. We’ve got to have a few non-CEOs getting some of the money.

    To: Nick@gawker.com

    Dude, WTF? Why the hell would you want to bitchslap your gateway site?

    Seriously, this is the worst bit of judgment I’ve seen lately, and keep in mind that there have been some pretty serious lapses in the last few months. Read your own damn site and look at how many comments are already posted and protesting your decision to cut Carey and Chris. I understand that you have to look at it from a business perspective and all but if you take away what brings your readers in to begin with then you will end up with fewer readers, which begets less ad revenue, leading to further cuts, back to fewer readers, even less ad revenue, more cuts – maybe you see a pattern?

    How many of those posts indicate that Consumerist was the site that lead people to explore the others? How many say that they check only one of your sites multiple times a day and that that site is Consumerist? How many of them indicate that they aren’t too awfully pleased with the content on the other sites? Now compare that to the number of negative comments that are posted about Consumerist. Wow, those numbers make a big ratio, don’t they, Nick?

    Given the nature of Consumerist, it only makes sense to me that revenue from your other sites be shared with Consumerist. I dint go to none of dem dere fancy bidness schools or nothing, but shucks, if I was ter be a company ezecutive I don’t much reckon that I’d want to pay money to put my name out there what with all dem complaints. People mights be thinking I was a bad company, too. And what if you was to rite up sometin nasty ’bout my company? I would have to pull any purty pictures or whatnot I’d have done paid for and then I’d have to get those church clothes wearing gentlemens down the hallway to ring you up and take my money back.

    And you know what, the lack of ads on Consumerist gives it more credibility. I for one can say that if I read a favorable post about Company X and then noticed a large ad for Company X on the same page, I’d have to assume that Company X also got a bit of favorable copy in the deal.

    Of all the economic woes that have saddened me of late (and my husband was in the mortgage biz and has since been out of work for 13 of the last 24 months) this dumb ass memo of yours is what put me over the edge. Shit, if Consumerist can’t make it, then what the hell am I going to do?

    FYI – I plan on posting this on Consumerist along with your email address. I hope you get a fiery hellstorm heaped upon you for this decision.

    To Ben, Meg, Carey and Chris, if you all decide to leave and do your thing on another site, count me in. I’ll drop Gawker faster than you can delete a “free hot girls I’m a Nigerian prince in jail lose weight while you watch tv” email. I think I can go ahead and speak for many other Consumerist loyalists – you lead, we’ll follow.

    Nick, please reconsider. Listen to your audience. Shuffle elsewhere, make it work. Take out a damn sub-prime loan if you have to; my husband can walk you through it. Just don’t cut Consumerist.

    One last thought: none of your other editors or contributors seem to be as in demand with the popular media as Ben. Surely you have thought about that type of exposure and the number of new viewers that check out Consumerist for the first time after seeing Ben talk about the grocery shrink ray. Given those fresh opportunities, I assume you’ve thought about how sad it would be to have all those newbies turn away from your sites because Consumerist was found to be lacking. ‘Twould be a pity.

    Good god, man, we are logging into Consumerist MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY! That should count for something.

    I look forward to your response and I look forward to hearing that Consumerist will remain intact and ready to keep working for the masses.

    SparklyJ

  169. DannyG227 says:

    Sorry to see Carey and Chris leave. Hope the both of you the best.

  170. Skankingmike says:

    you know i started coming here through digg, and haven’t left. Consumerist has awesome articles and usually entertain me. There’s not many ads, personally i don’t care if you’d have ads for Dell or Walmart, but I understand you can’t have them due to the nature of this site. But like some others have said there has to be other area’s for revenue. Cutting this site that probably sees more traffic than most of your other ones is stupid.

    I bet this site has helped all your other sites that do get traffic get more traffic. Thus increased the revenue there. If you do any further cutting or get rid of Consumerist, I personally will just never visit any of your other sites.

    Honestly, I believe that the remaining crew should just leave and start their own Consumerist site and destroy your company.

    Peace.

  171. stuny says:

    New revenue generating ideas:

    1. Charge commenters fro typos
    2. Charge extra for blaming the OP
    3. You can only say “Best Buy Sucks” once per posting, after that, you are charged on a sliding scale
    4. Oooh, got it! Don’t just publish corporate email addresses for EECB. Instead build a system to send the blasts as a service and charge Consumerist readers to send them! (Best Buy, however, would always be free, as a public service)

  172. Nick1693 says:

    I’m writing an EECB. Yes, To Nick Denton.

  173. TaylorBizzle says:

    It’s VERY NICE to read a letter from a boss that explains things VERY well. I would want to work for someone like that. The flipside of this for 98% of other companies is you show up and they escort you out thedoor and you have no clue why. This explains it and for the persons being let go must be some consilation that it has nothing to do with their content but all about the almighty dollar.

  174. canuckistani says:

    wow..Wonkette was lucky to get out when it did

  175. EricLecarde says:

    So in 2 weeks are we going to see a post called,”Confessions of a Gawker Media Employee”? Just kidding, it’ll be sad to see the two leave. The weekends are when I do most of my site. Hopefully there will be some good stuff on here to tide me over.

  176. dragonfire81 says:

    I just had a thought, maybe the weekends could feature editor approved “guest submissions” by some of us commenters or other willing folk.

    I’m a writer by trade I’d be willing to do a piece or two.

  177. radiochief says:

    Major bummer.

  178. humphrmi says:

    Sad to see Chris and Carey go. Since weekends are the only time I have to get my corporate rantings organized, Chris has posted most of my submissions.

    I too was drawn to the other Gawker Media sites by Consumerist. In fact, I was drawn to Consumerist by an RSS feed aggregator at work, that is no longer functioning. Sigh.

  179. babette says:

    I am a lurker by nature and do not comment often, but I am here everyday without fail. I check Consumerist before I check my email. It is the first thing I do in the morning and the last before I go to sleep.
    To Chris and Carey- Thank you for the contributions you have made here and best of luck in your future endeavors. I have to pose the same question my Aunt asked when my husband and I found ourselves out of work in July. Even in this difficult time, do you wish to invest so much of your time and energy in a company that does not appreciate your contribution?
    The entire staff at Consumerist has given our family the knowledge to effectively handle disputes with businesses and has saved us a tidy sum in the past few years.
    I find this course of action despicable and justifying it with gnashing of teeth over the economy doubly so.
    If there is one thing I have learned this year, it is this.Even in the midst of economic hardship and declining job opportunities, quality talent will always be able to find employment.

  180. Jage says:

    I’m very disappointed.

    I spend an inordinate amount of time on many of the various gawker sites, from Kotaku and Gizmodo to io9 and even the occasional peek at Fleshbot when I’m in Google chrome incognito mode, and Lifehacker when I want some nifty program. In fact, I go to the sites so much that they dominate my bookmarks Quicklinks.

    But, by far, the site I visit the most is The Consmuerist. It has, in my opinion, the best writing, the most interesting stories, and I believe I learn more here then in many of my classes. Granted, I’m browsing The Consumerist in the middle of those classes but that’s besides the point.

    The thing I liked so much about Gawker was their great variety, and it seems to me like this variety is slowly leaking from this network. Sure, Kotaku is great for gaming news, but to be honest I can easily get the exact same information at some other sites. The same is true for Gizmodo, and io9. The thing I like most about the Gawker media network is the places like no other I’ve seen on the Internet.

    I don’t know where I’ll go if The Consumerist slowly gets the axe over the next year. Hopefully, someone will leap to fill the void.

    The thing that makes me sad is that I’m completely powerless to do anything about it. I guess I can click on the advertisements every time I pop in, but I don’t know if 20 clicks a day is going to make a difference (I know, I’m obsessive.)

    I guess I’ll have to wait and see, and maybe just find something else to do with all my time. But I must say, The Consumerist, I will miss you.

    In all your glory.

  181. notbob50 says:

    I’m really sorry this is happening. But it just reflects the sad, sorry state of the economy. Thank you George Bush for all you do.

  182. ? graffiksguru says:

    Nooo! Say it ain’t so! Nick, you have to know that your shooting yourself in the foot. Granted I love me some Gizmodo and Lifehacker, but Consumerist is the one I check first everyday. Chris and Carey, I loved reading your posts and am sad to see you go, hopefully they will bring you back, when things turn around. I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors.

  183. MissPeacock says:

    Chris and Carey, I’ve been reading your work for a long time now and I’m crushed that you won’t be here any more. I hope you find wonderful new jobs (and let us know where we can find you).

  184. MsAnthropy says:

    This really, really sucks and I’m sorry to hear it. Both are great writers, and Consumerist (and Gawker as a whole) will be worse off without them.

    I have to say, Consumerist is one of my favorite sites, one of the ones I HAVE to visit (several times) daily, whereas the rest of Gawker… well, I wouldn’t even know about most of those sites if not for the links on Consumerist, and while Lifehacker etc are great, Consumerist is my favorite of the bunch, by far.

    Good luck, guys. Yet another example of crappy things happening to people who really, really don’t deserve it. :(

    Now where, do I send my EECB?

  185. thoseturtles says:

    Dear Gawker Overlords, I find it completely unacceptable
    that you would go so far as to fire some of the best posters on the internet. I understand it is a recession. I understand that their are business motives, but that is no reason to deprive someone of their livlihood and faithful readers of their idols. Like TVarmy, I visted consumerist first before branching out to Lifehacker and Gizmodo. Honestly, hire casey and chris back, you need them.

  186. Mistrez_Mish says:

    Ugh – wtf

    Cut Chris and Carey to hire 10 new people? Very very weak. Consumerist has been my favorite of all of Gawker media’s sites and they were one of the reasons why (the whole team does a fantastic job)

    I’ll miss you guys.

  187. Grrrrrrr, now with two buns made of bacon. says:

    Chris and Carey..be sure to let us know where you end up so we can take a significant portion of our blog-reading business elsewhere.

  188. zolielo says:

    I would have thought that Jalopnik would be a cash generator.

  189. comatoseone says:

    This is such a bummer that you’ve waken me out of my lurker coma to register on this site! Major bummer! Hello, in these worsening economic times, doesn’t Gawker get that consumer sites like this will be in demand and traffic will grow only with great writers like Carey and Chris!?!?!?

  190. ninjatoddler says:

    My best wishes to all their future endeavors. They will be sorely missed.

  191. ninjatoddler says:

    From my experience, Gizmodo is nothing but a heavily biased blog with some rather unprofessional mods and bad writing. I’d rather they get the cuts than the Consumerist.

  192. Clobberella says:

    JEZEBEL is getting new staff but you’re cutting here??? Are you kidding me?? Surely the market for rabid hyperfeminists who also like to chat about hair and makeup and gossip about celebrities while taking giant bong hits can’t be that huge.

    This is utter nonsense. I have to chime in with everyone else who’s said they check this site multiple times a day and who would never have read any of the other sites if not for coming here first. I don’t comment often, but I read this site every single day, and my husband does as well. This site goes beyond mere entertainment and actually provides a service. If Gawker would rather pump money into frivolous nonsense sites in order to chip away at ones that actually produce content, well, I think they will find themselves losing big time. Just like the rest of us.

    Seriously, please set up a save Chris and Carey fund. I don’t have a lot of money, but I will happily donate all I can. I don’t know what I’d do with myself without this place.

    • thelushie says:

      @Clobberella: I agree completely. I can’t believe they are downsizing the consumerist but Jezebel is growing. In my opinion, that site needs to be taken down. It gives women a bad name. Hilariously, I prefer Fleshbot! I find the content more intellectual than Jezebel (Love ya Richard!).

      (I comment on Jezebel every now and again just to provide a voice of reasons among the hysterics).

      Let us know where Chris and Carey end up so we can all go read them.

  193. Soldier_CLE says that Hideo Kojima has to make MGS till the day he dies! says:

    This is really weak, as others on here have said.

    To Nick Danton (if he even bothers to read his own blogs):

    Do you mean to tell me that in lieu of the pending crises in the United States that you are going to cut two editors from this particular media blog, in lieu of more writers/editors for “Wonkette” style “Journalism”?

    That’s just wrong, Nick; and you know it.

    You’ve just managed to weaken your MOST IMPORTANT blog.

    Good job.

  194. GoVegan says:

    Sorry to hear about the staff cuts. This is always a fun and informative site and I am sure that the 2 people being laid off were a part of making Consumerist that way. Its also ironic that as the economy is getting worse, a consumer orientated website is forced to make cuts. I think TVarmy may have a good idea where you can have a paypal link to donate. If everyone reading the Consumerist pitched in just a few dollars, it would probably add up. Best of luck to the people laid off.

  195. BoraBora says:

    I am so sorry to gear this, I really like Chris and Carey’s articles.

  196. am84 says:

    Sad. Best of luck to you two. I’d just like to echo everyone else who said this is the only Gawker website I read.

  197. WiglyWorm must cease and decist says:

    You have to love when others suffer for poor “commercial judgment” of their supperiors. The head honchos at Gawker Media are, I’m sure, still livin it up.

    Thats a shame, too bad Gawker doesn’t realize that if not for the stellar website that is consumerist.com, I (and I’m guessing alot of other people too) would never have stumbled across Gizmodo, Lifehacker, Jalopnik, etc.

    Yeah, that basically sums it up.

  198. el_smurfo says:

    Really? io9 has broader appeal than consumerist? Tried it…deleted my bookmark after a few weeks.

  199. el_smurfo says:

    p.s. blaming the “recession” is total b.s. it’s a reorg along denton’s favorites, with the less “sexy” sites being left out in the cold.

  200. ninjatoddler says:

    Just a side thought but are there any law agencies who are willing to help sponsor the Consumerist to get back Carey first and foremost, and also Chris Walters?

  201. fulanoche says:

    Too bad. Let me take Gizmodo and Deadspin off my favorites. bye

  202. Gokuhouse says:

    That really is too bad. This was my favorite site. Hopefully they can keep the articles coming like they have been. Lifehacker is number 2 for me.

  203. ExtraCelestial says:

    I’m know I’m echoing everyone else when I say how sad I am to hear this. I can’t tell you how many Consumerist articles I’ve quoted and linked for friends and co-workers. Consumerist also popped my Gawker cherry and gatewayed me into the hard stuff like Jezebel. Plus my pic was posted once!

    So sad to lose you Chris and Carey :o(

  204. Advertising? Revenue?

    I am the guy that never looks at online advertising and if I accidently did, I would never click on a link (thus preventing some revenue being generated).

    It is not greed as much as I support local businesses (or atleast megacompanies that hire local employees) whenever possible, even if it means paying slightly more (which in reality is seldom the case). I am sure I am not the only one that feels/does their web viewing this way and so the click to generate revenue model does not work well with all consumers.

    It is not just Consumerist. For example, I love Pandora, but they have never made a penny from my listenership.

    Websites that run on hopes of making $ from a few clicks are going to run into problems. Do I want you to sell ad space or require membership payments? Gosh darn no. But at the same time the click advertisement to generate revenue model that so many companies are using seems to have run its course. Would I pay to use Pandora? No, I am cheap and would listen to local radio (gag) instead. But maybe I would pay to listen to Premium Pandora, a site that would give me greater control over my “free” music.

    Maybe Consumerist can evolve into a higher level of service for consumers. Such as paid support for those really obnoxious situations when a consumer needs some professional or semi-professional assistance. This way the Consumerist site can be a means to generate revenue by selling your own product/service and would not be forced to sell yourself to corporate greed (oops, I mean advertising) ?

  205. bitplayer says:

    Spin the site off as a nonprofit or try to market it to an existing nonprofit that deals with consumer issues.

  206. ProfessionalCritic says:

    Oh no. I am really sad to hear this. Like many readers I check this site several times a day. It’s well-written, chock full o’educational nuggets and also hilarious. Added bonus: unlike other Gawker sites, is not insufferably enamored of its own hipness. Best of luck to Chris and Carey.

  207. Gee. Gawker Media knows how to handle a crisis. And how to set expectations for the coming year. But whither Consumerist? I mean, there’s a LOT of dissatisfaction generated in a downturn.

    Maybe a portion of Consumerist needs to address the FuckedCompany angle? I know you’re hurting now, but seriously. We’re in a downturn, and part of ‘consumer reporting’ is telling us ‘consumers’ who isn’t going to make the cut in this economy. And who’s ‘products’ we shouldn’t be investing in for that reason.

  208. hardtoremember says:

    Sorry to hear this. I read this site every day.
    You are losing some great writers but it is a business.
    Thank you for all of the great reading and information. As always Consumerist will be one of my three open tabs first thing every morning.

  209. yaos says:

    I like how you blame the companies inability to be managed correctly on the economy. Keep grasping at those straws!

  210. JulesNoctambule says:

    How much did this ridiculous new commenting system cost to implement? I’d rather have kept Chris and Carey than had new bells and whistles.

  211. chartrule says:

    wouldn’t it be easier to move 10 people around rather than to fire 19 people and then hire 10 new ones

    talk about a lack of care for the people that help make the money

    sounds more like greed on the part of the owners rather than any loyalty to their audience

  212. CajunGuy says:

    This is quite disheartening. The Consumerist is one of the first sites I hit every day. Not to mention how often I cite the site (see what I did thar!?) to my friends and relatives.

    I’m sorry, but this recession bullcrap doesn’t float with me. I think it’s pretty cowardly to fire people over what MIGHT happen. If you CURRENTLY can’t afford to operate your business, fine, you have to cut back. But if your basing decisions on what you THINK you’ll be making, or losing, in the future, maybe you should try something else before shitcanning people.

    I’m finding way too many businesses are using this “recession” crap as an excuse to do things they shouldn’t be doing.

    Cut back pay. Quit giving so many bonuses. Stop paying for porn. But for the love of Mickey Mouse, don’t START by firing people.

  213. johnfrombrooklyn says:

    Starting a blog is easy. They can start their own blogs, compete with consumerist, and probably do better than just drawing a salary.

  214. johnfrombrooklyn says:

    Unfortunately due to the economy, I’ve also had to reduce my blog postings by 20%.

  215. BeeBoo says:

    Well of course a website that attacks corporations’ crappy behavior is not going to draw advertising.

    Duh.

    However, I bet this is the most popular site in the the Gawker media kingdom, or one of the most popular. Perhaps the other sites in the kingdom should be crediting Consumerist for the advertising. A lot of corporations track economic exchange between divisions.

  216. kyle4 says:

    This is bad news, plain and simple. I’m a fan of Chris and Carey’s posts just as I’m a fan of Meg’s and Ben’s. They’re a unit, and it’s so disappointing that they’re gone now. Consumerist is one of my favorite sites and one I go to daily.

    I do feel that because of the good this site does in informing others about companies, it has worked against them because companies don’t want a site they’re paying to write poorly about them, even when it’s the truth.

    I know that what has happened here is bad, but I hope Consumerist keeps its editorial head up and continues to assist consumers with the knowledge they should have.

    Farewell Chris and Carey!

  217. Luna City says:

    Will Kotaku see any cuts? They could stand to lose some of the hacks on their staff, especially the bush league weekend bloggers.

  218. moore850 says:

    I’m confused. You fired people and hired people? Wouldn’t it be easier just to not do either?

    • Erwos says:

      @moore850: They fired some people on Consumerist, and then hired new folks for the blogs that were actually profitable. This is a fairly standard thing to do – it’s called maximizing ROI. The irony is that most of the “injustices” this blog rails against are doing the same thing, just on a larger scale.

  219. Though I’ve read Jalopnik and Gizmodo for years, I’ve read the consumerist for quite some time, and it’s made it into the daily read. I’ll be sad to see 2 good writers go when there are obviously some bad writers on other sites, but hopefully these 2 can find great jobs elsewhere, they’re obviously well liked.

  220. SkittleKicks says:

    Consumerist is what introduced me to the rest of the Gawker empire, and is still the first site I view everyday. Good luck, Chris and Carey!

  221. HoldenBeach says:

    This is my first comment on any Gawker site, but I’ve been an avid reader of a few of them — especially this one — for quite some time.

    I think many people that read TC would understand that this isn’t a commercially viable website. Like Consumer Reviews, you can’t take advertising… and then be impartial. I could easily see paying $25 per year to keep the current load of content coming into TC. I understand those left will work extra hard, but there’s simply no way they can do it all.

    You’ve got two weeks left. You know your population numbers. Why not give it a shot and see how many will pay for a subscription? Give us a gold star by our names or something.

  222. mariospants says:

    There is an echo in the firmament… I’m having a huge case of “deja vu” right now.

    I was completely unaware that the Gawker blogs required so much overhead. Good to see that you guys are on top of it, though.

  223. vladthepaler says:

    I look at gizmodo once in a while but otherwise this is the only of the sites mentioned in that letter that I ever go to, and I visit the Consumerist pretty regularly. Cutting two out of four writers is pretty drastic.

    I always thought this gawkster thing was just a bunch of indepentant web sites that agreed to promote each other, I didn’t know it was some company that owned you.

  224. Andrewjh says:

    Sad.
    Consumerist is the one Gawker site I visit every day – and the only one I feel comfortable reading at work.
    I’ve come to rely on the tidbits I pick up here, and am always on the lookout for tips.
    Wish there was something we could do to help.

  225. Myszka says:

    A real shame.

  226. Stupid_Losers says:

    Wait let me get this straight. You’re firing 19 people to raise everyone else’s pay and hire 10 new people. In these times of economic hardship this seems like a rather silly plan to me. Couldn’t they just keep those people and cut out some of those bonuses. I would like to think that having a job is slightly more important than getting a bonus for driving traffic to your site.

  227. YasirManius says:

    WTF I love the consumerist and it is WAY better than the other gawker sites. This sucks. I would donate money to keep the consumerist alive and running well. Let the people decide. If we give enough to the consumerist then these cutbacks can be prevented.

  228. britne says:

    Wow. Just wow.
    By your own admission the economy sucks, and the response is to cut half the staff of the most-economy focused blog in your empire?
    Best wishes to Carey and Chris. I’ll gladly donate to a fund/pay a subscription/etc. to keep them on board. Best wishes to Ben and Meg as well – covering the depth and breadth of topics this blog covers with half the staff will be a challenge.

  229. pschroeter says:

    I need you guys to explain the evolving, developing crisis to me, and occasionally make me laugh a little about it! This is absolutely the worse time to do something like this to you, and to us.

  230. Whyspir says:

    Instead of laying off the 19 people…why not lay off only the 9 and shuffle around the other 10 to the other sites?

    It’d make more sense to me at least…

  231. BrianDaBrain says:

    I just found this post because of Carey’s goodbye post… To say that I am disappointed is an understatement. I was referred to this site about a year ago, and it has since become the most visited site on both my home and work computers. Without Consumerist, I’d spend my days staring stupidly into nothingness at work, and my home life would be that much less entertaining. And, hell, without Consumerist (the best of the Gawker bunch, in my not-so-humble opinion) I never would have heard of Lifehacker and all the other sites in the Gawker network. This is truly a shame, and I really hope that Gawker realizes it’s mistake and that Consumerist is able to start raking in the bucks to hire Chris and Carey back. :(

  232. dialing_wand says:

    There’s nothing wrong with a loss leader – especially not one as valuable as Consumerist.

    I left Gawker Media sites alone until this one. I second discovering Lifehacker and Jalopnik through Consumerist.

    I second the EECB. I’d pay monthly to keep this site ad-free and keep Chris and Casey.

  233. DeborahJackal says:

    Kotaku? Seriously? I’m a gaming fanatic and I can’t stand that piece of shit site. It’s panders way too much to the developers. And… fleshbot? I guess the sex sells adage has always been true. I just never thought that anyone would throw their morals away and let a site like fleshbot assume a higher value than something as valuable as consumerist.

    I understand that gawker media has to adhere to capitalism to stay afloat, but it’s sad when capitalism makes you blind to what should be your moral standards.

  234. Toltendo says:

    I have to say that this site and its writers has some of the best consumer journalism compared to the “mainstream” media of consumerism. I hope your friends find something good to work at later on.