digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

Gizmodo officially banned from CES

news.com — The Gizmodo staffer violated the terms of CES media credentials and caused harm to CES exhibitors. This Gizmodo staffer has been identified and will be barred from attending any future CES events. Additional sanctions against Gizmodo and Gawker Media are under discussion.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • orehitna, on 01/12/2008, -177/+25i threw this down on one of the other diggs on the same subject, but I'm adding it here too.

    I guess I can agree with CEA's decision to bar the individual, but further reprocussions are ridiculous. The only thing that should have been an issue (as Brian Lam addresses in the link provided in Rafe's post) was the Moto press conference / keynote. Otherwise, who cares? Childish? Sure. Hilarious? Absolutely
    • fkr3, on 01/12/2008, -8/+110Gizmodo deserve this and more. They were dicks at CES and the rest of the time they're mostly blogspam anyway. I'm sure they'll just find some bloger that does go to CES next year and reword his work anyway.
    • josho, on 01/12/2008, -8/+107no. it's hilarious if you're selfish, immature, and have yet to experience your testicles descending into their adult location.
      this was moronic and pretty damaging to that whole creed of "HEY BLOGGERZ ARE JOURNALISTS TOOOOOOOO." they deserve no kudos and should enjoy only shame.
      • GawtMilk, on 01/12/2008, -27/+6What do you mean, not funny? They TURNED off TELEVISIONS!

        If you don't see the humor in that, I'd say you should learn yourself some funnies detecting classes.
        • DroogInPhoenix, on 01/12/2008, -3/+14If your a child yes... But this is business, pure business, this is the time for companys to make an impression, and to shut TVs down is just wrong. You have to be a child because you defiantly don't understand business.
      • Books, on 01/12/2008, -5/+4Well, Bloggers aren't really journalists. Anyone can be a blogger, really. To be a journalist, you need to be accredited by going to school and stuff. I think they're keeping the line between: "Hey, we're bloggers and sometimes we do funny, stupid things. Unlike those journalists who are stuck up and are still trying to find Osama bin Laden."
      • SysstemLord, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5That wasn't funny a bit even, it was children's play, and it caused damage.
    • virtualball, on 01/12/2008, -6/+66See, the problem is this; people's jobs are dependent on the presentation. If the presentation went well, then the people who worked on it would be rewarded, and also, the product would be well received. Also, Motorola should be pissed because this childish stunt eclipsed whatever they were introducing/talking about. Let me go to your job (probably a McDonald's cashier) and unplug the register when you are trying to take orders. Well? How would you like it? It's all in good humor!
      • JudgeMonkey, on 01/12/2008, -46/+7Ah, demeaning people for making an honest living (McDonalds workers that is). That's always fun. And no, I don't work at McDonalds.
        • virtualball, on 01/12/2008, -6/+37Well, to be honest, I was using McDonald's becuase A) His lack of respect for one's job, which means he obviously doesn't work in a corporate enviornment and B) It was an easy example.

          Though, thanks for completely missing the point.
        • orehitna, on 01/14/2008, -2/+0unfortunately for you, i do happen to work in a corporate environment. the disabling of tvs on the display walls is a prank. i've been pranked in every office job i've worked it. if you happened to actually read what i said in the first place, you'd recognize that I noted the issue, however briefly, with the Motorola presentation part as that is detrimental to the effect of the actual presentations.

          As for the display wall televisions? Yes, childish, damage caused to a company's sales records, presentation or potential profits? No. If for some bizarre reason you can justify how that could actually affect the sales, then by all means, believe in it. Unfortunately at that point, maybe you should be seeking employment in the fast food industry.
      • omelette, on 01/13/2008, -2/+1Sure, the guy making the presentation has grounds to be upset, but Motorola as a company? Are you nuts? They're getting ridiculous amounts of press on an otherwise unremarkable presentation. Are you people really this naive? This situation is a marketing department wet-dream. What? We're headlining CES news coverage? And it didn't cost us a dime? You can bet your ass that within the next couple of years money will exchange hands to stage a similar event in the hopes that it draws as much attention.
    • omelette, on 01/12/2008, -41/+4I agree with ore on this one. I think the prank showed some poor judgment... but it WAS funny. And it came at the end of one of the weakest productions CEA has put on in years. If you invite the neighborhood to a week-long party you had better plan something to occupy them. Sure, Gizmodo went over the line. But this is literally the ONLY remarkable news from Vegas all week. Come on, they had to give us something.
    • richbleak, on 01/12/2008, -2/+46People who classify this as "hilarious" reveal themselves to be simple minded. I've even seen this called "genius". Jesus, this proves that we are all really just animals that have learned how to make noises that other, similar, animals recognize. Gizmodo blows.
      • hippykiller, on 01/12/2008, -20/+3Ya like at CES, animals that have learned to make noises that other, similar animals recognize, and then stick on a few hundred flat screen monitors that will be in landfills within ten years. Ya we are all on the right track. If it was not for those damn children CES could probably change the world. You animals take your selfs way to serious sometimes.
    • DocHoliday22, on 01/12/2008, -2/+33I would be pretty pissed if I went to the CES show as a spectator and couldn't see all the cool gadgets and ***** at work because some moron just kept turning them off with his toy.
    • merdiesel, on 01/12/2008, -1/+34"i threw this down on one of the other diggs"...? come on. You "threw it down"? what does that even mean?
      • peaceninja, on 01/12/2008, -2/+13i can speak jive, i'll translate: "I gave my opinion on one of the digg submissions in the past".
        • omar199, on 01/12/2008, -2/+14dugg for making me remember airplane
      • orehitna, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0sometimes ah' fo'get dat ah' need t'rap in clear, consise and overly intelligent wo'ds so's dat sucka's on de internet duzn't gots an issue graspin' de terms I'm usin', lest ah' be refered t'as an idiot. Man!
    • Aaronthethird, on 01/12/2008, -0/+9The problem is, if they didn't penalize Gizmodo for turning off TV's then other people might start doing the same thing to be funny and cute and before you know it you can't contain the problem because there are handfuls of people doing the same thing so they can have funny videos to post on their blogs. That would be a huge headache and counterproductive to the show, so I think they are doing the right thing in bringing down the hammer on these guys. They should have known better than to do such a completely stupid and disruptive act at such a high profile show.
      • jakem1, on 01/12/2008, -3/+2Yeah, who knows where it could end. This could be the end of civilisation.
    • widgetmaker, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5It isn't hilarious when some poor guy gets in serious ***** because of his presentation going wrong.
    • rpgmaker, on 01/12/2008, -1/+5The video wasn't THAT funny, without the soundtrack it would be even less funny but it sure shows how childish the people at Gizmodo are. Seriously Giz, you deserve to be sued for this.
      • jakem1, on 01/12/2008, -2/+2Why stop at litigation? Let's form a mob and hang them.
      • stonr2, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1how about "lynch [them] in a back alley" ?
  • xoineg, on 01/12/2008, -35/+892They had it coming. What they did was just childish. Is ok to play around, but interrupting and disrupting the show during a presentation is not a professional behavior in any way. They will probably will not have been banned is they had done this after the presentation or at a much smaller scale.
    • UncleCrapper, on 01/12/2008, -120/+6Thank you Grandpa xoineg.
    • Obsession88, on 01/12/2008, -102/+11Childish or not it was still pretty funny.
      • xpankrat, on 01/12/2008, -9/+52No, it was not.
        • diggmeyoubitch, on 01/12/2008, -6/+39Yes and no. Turning off an LCD while some kid is playing Guitar Hero III is funny. Turning off a monitor while someone is giving a presentation to the press is not. Messing with some one playing a game is one thing, but messing with someone giving a presentation that a company is depending on is another.
        • Xplorer, on 01/12/2008, -3/+10No its not funny, this is how crap laws get passed in technology. All it will take is one person with power getting bent out of shape before we have laws saying that it is illegal to send any signals via IR unless specified by the devices manufacturer.

          These devices have their place, but CES is not it.

          Gizmodo: "Hello Foot" - *BANG*
        • fabiosir, on 01/12/2008, -7/+2Yeah, it was. I mean, it's not funny for the people giving the presentation, and it's not really funny for real life, but if this was some kind of comedy movie, this would be pretty damned funny, especially when he said "let's turn away from this monitor" only to have the other one go down moments later.

          I'd probably have gone nuts if I was that guy though.
        • saisumimen, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3@ Xplorer

          You're totally right. This is why cellphone jammers are illegal in the US. Sure, they have their uses, but waaaay too many ***** would be jamming people's phones for no reason.
        • davosjh, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0daddy? what's a "*****?"
    • freakon, on 01/12/2008, -2/+84Remember people, they put tubgirl on the front page of kotaku.
    • j1ggy, on 01/12/2008, -5/+142Honestly, it says nowhere in that article that Gizmodo is banned. It says just the staffer is banned.
      • Loxahatchee, on 01/12/2008, -3/+11It is nice to see at least one person on here that knows reading comprehension.
      • magus_melchior, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3Given the head editor's cavalier attitude about this, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the trade shows reject/revoke their press pass applications...
    • stephant, on 01/12/2008, -53/+6Whatever. If it weren't for gizmodo no one would have even read a single article about CES this year.
      • funkydude101, on 01/12/2008, -0/+33engadget?
      • estvir, on 01/12/2008, -1/+33Yup, because Gizmodo are the only ones in the whole wide world reporting on CES.

        I really hope I'm missing something from your comment because otherwise, you're unbelievably stupid.
      • virtualball, on 01/12/2008, -2/+12Joystiq?
      • jakem1, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1Yeah, others may have reported on it but Gizmodo are the ones that got the most and therefore the best publicity.
    • Lacero, on 01/12/2008, -9/+50Good! I always considered the Gizmodo people as a bunch of douchebags, even before this stunt. It gives me a great deal of pleasure seeing their idiot banned and the site given the lickings for the ***** it was, is and will always be.
    • Urkel, on 01/12/2008, -5/+58It's only one staffer banned but personally, I think Gizmodo should be banned because they knew exactly what their people were up to.

      Their "prank" is the equivelent of someone unplugging the Gizmodo servers in the middle of CES and it's absolutely sick that Gizmodo doesn't see how their actions can negatively affect a demo of companies in such a competetive arena.
      • JKVM, on 01/12/2008, -23/+3Equivalent of unplugging servers? Is it as hard to boot a server as turn on a TV? Evidently it is if you're an idiot staffer at CES.
        • spudnic, on 01/12/2008, -0/+7It doesn't matter how easy it is to turn back on, it gives the impression that the technology they are demonstrating has problems, and isn't ready. If you can't see how this is a bad thing you're an idiot.
          Gizmodo have dealt a serious blow to the credibility of bloggers and online journalists in general.
        • sinkleir, on 01/12/2008, -4/+0Credibility of bloggers? Are you insane? There is and never will be anything such as credibility of bloggers...
      • Dakart, on 01/12/2008, -0/+17Good analogy with the servers there... I don't understand why Gizmodo just doesn't come out and apologize.
        • Brian.Honaker, on 01/12/2008, -8/+1To save face they really should apologize. 1. for having done it, 2. For having the balls to put it up on their site and celebrate it. It WAS comedic genius, unfortunately, that's not the service Gizmodo should be offering.
          • gfnw, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Comedic genius? It's the same thing that school kids used to do in class with those IR wristwatches during videos and presentations.
            To the kid and his little circle of friends it's hilarious, to the rest of the class it's tedious and annoying.
        • Urkel, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Turning off a TV is your version of "comedic genius"? Read about Wozniaks antics with pranks. For hours he'd screw with people's heads but here's what makes him closer to "genius" and Gizmodo "asses".

          Woz invented the gadgets he pranked with and things like his TV pranks were against college kids in a dorm. Gizmodo took devices a decade old and did it in a business environment.


    • betterth, on 01/12/2008, -3/+17The instructions were explicitly not to interrupt any media event or press conference. The blogger violated that, and did cause trouble. If he hadn't we wouldn't have even heard about this.
      • kublerross, on 01/12/2008, -11/+3yes, and death upon those that dare violate the sacred rites of corporate masturbation during the grand ritual of CES
    • cliffzdude, on 01/12/2008, -6/+27The writer did a douche baggey thing. Ban him. Gizmodo could have said "bad douche bag", punished him, and theyd' be fine. But they continued on with the douch bagism by posting the video. Thus, Gizmodo are co-douchebaggers along with said douche-bag wirter...
      Ban Gizmodo.
      • Urkel, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4I'd like to see Gizmodo exercise their "comedic genius" at Macworld. Start unplugging the demos of some vendors. Use an airhorn every time Jobs announces a new product. Turn off the wifi for all the live-bloggers.

        I'm sure in that environment then everyone will all get a great big chuckle and Gizmodo will once again prove that pranks and business go hand in hand.
      • omelette, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1It's my hope that enough real gadget news will come out of Macworld that even if a prank like this DID go down, it wouldn't get the headlines this has. My opinion on the Gizmodo stunt is that while the guys DID cross the line, there's no way this should be making news. This is a lot of distraction to the fact that this year's CES was a complete waste of airfare. If my hotel room and most of my meals hadn't been comp'ed, I'd be flat-out pissed. It's no wonder folks covering it got restless and pulled ***** like this. My friends and I went to Vegas specifically for CES but ended up spending as much time in the Casinos and over at AVN as we did looking at new gadgetry.
    • Elliuotatar, on 01/12/2008, -8/+5I called it! Soon as I saw that story posted there, I left a note saying that their posting that was as dumb as a kid posting pics of himself drinking or smoking pot on myspace, and they'd be lucky if they didn't end up banned from CES as a result. It's amazing the poor judgement this site and their sister site Kotaku have shown. I wonder how old the folks that run those sites are. Pollly mid twenties.
    • diggdat, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6After this digg thread and other related posts to other sites calm down, you can expect to see Gizmodo issue an apology. Then they will enjoy the third traffic grab and add revenue. The first when they themselves blogged/bragged about it, the second when just one person gets banned over it and the third when or if they issue an apology statement or other related post. Then it will posted to Digg and other sites, if not by others then by themselves.
    • Loxahatchee, on 01/12/2008, -9/+1Grow the ***** up, you pussy.
    • shadoturtl, on 01/12/2008, -0/+8I don't expect much more from blogspam....kevin can we get them banned from digg as well?
  • glucoseboy, on 01/12/2008, -24/+677Gizmodo should be banned. I mean, they were messing with someone while they were doing their job. How would the Gizmodo blogger feel if someone randomly shut down their laptop while they were trying to write a post?
    • TheRealAlzabo, on 01/12/2008, -6/+88Or maybe their site.....it's ***** and I'd think about suing....
      • natenovs, on 01/12/2008, -19/+3i think they shut the site off themselve when theyre tryin to live blog.
    • ufia, on 01/12/2008, -5/+94I agree. This looked more like criminal sabotage than a funny prank.

      I don't think Gizmodo has thought their cunning plan all the way through.
      • kunjan1029, on 01/12/2008, -0/+27I think they thought they were at DefCon and not CES.
        • Ellipsys, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Had they pulled that crap at DefCon, they would probably end up like last year's "reporter" incident. That was funny as hell.
      • allengeer, on 01/12/2008, -17/+3transmitting an infrared signal on an acceptable band for consumer electronics is not criminal.
        • bigt8dogg, on 01/12/2008, -1/+8But to put malice and forethought into the whole situation is...
        • magus_melchior, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Nice try, allen, but that's not the violation. Thank you for playing.
    • Vegabondsx, on 01/12/2008, -3/+52I agree. They make it out to be fun and games, but really they're causing problems for people's businesses. Very immature.
    • stephant, on 01/12/2008, -53/+6All of you have to be kidding me. These presentations go on non-stop all day long and you think that turning off the TVs for a few minutes is somehow almost criminal? No one really cares about CES anymore (or any of the trade shows to be honest). This sort of thing breathes new life into an otherwise uneventful show. And the bunch of babies that reported them should be glad for all the free press that they would have NEVER gotten had it not been for gizmodo.
      • Verdanic, on 01/12/2008, -2/+18For a show that nobody cares about, CES sure does get a lot of attention from.. everybody, every year. Weird, hmm? Mayyybe it's just you?
    • Dylson, on 01/12/2008, -2/+17Good. Gizmodo had it comming. I can't believe they did this though.
    • Urkel, on 01/12/2008, -5/+38http://valleywag.com/343531/cnet-editor-proves-the ...
      Comment 7 from Gizmodo's Head Dope Brian Lam.
      "Relax. It was a joke." "Motorola, well that was a mistake, as my explicit orders to my video person were to not interrupt press conferences."

      Boy Those Gizmodo guys are true comedians. Let's hope someone reboots their servers during Macworld because he obviously would find that to be High-larious.
    • widgetmaker, on 01/12/2008, -1/+16How about a digg boycott of all Gizmodo articles for Macworld since they rely on quite alot of traffic from digg.
      • jakem1, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1Considering the number of Gizmodo posts that hit the front page here I'd say that Digg also relies on a lot of traffic from Gizmodo.
  • TheRealAlzabo, on 01/12/2008, -23/+412Seriously, biotch slaps are in order, that kinda ***** costs people money and wrecking presentations is WAY not cool or funny
    • rvngeofthelawn, on 01/12/2008, -4/+79imagine being up on that stage giving a presentation you've been writing for a month and half way through your visual aids turn off. i would probably ***** my pants
      • Billistic, on 01/12/2008, -28/+4I got some visual AIDS for ya
      • kublerross, on 01/12/2008, -9/+4maybe presentations arent your strong point
    • Konrad9, on 01/12/2008, -38/+6Costs people money?
      ....all they had to do was hit the power button.
      • theblt, on 01/12/2008, -2/+20They did hit the power button, and the Jizzmodo staff shut them down again. How can these presenters properly give their message and sell their product when it's being shut off constantly?
      • codelogic, on 01/12/2008, -3/+18Easy for you to say NOW after the fact and after knowing exactly what happened. Just sitting on my couch, I'd be puzzled for at least a few seconds if my TV suddently turned off. Now imaging that happening to you on stage in front of an audience.
    • omelette, on 01/12/2008, -24/+6I don't buy it. Motorola is getting EXPONENTIALLY more coverage out of this than any other single item at the show. COST money? I agree they were out of line but there's no way you can say this was bad for those pranked.
    • allengeer, on 01/12/2008, -18/+3imagine being stupid enough to not figure out the oldest prank in the book. cmon people. if the screen on the left shuts off. and then the screen on the right shuts off, right at the right moment, look for the kid in the classroom snickering. youre at a nerd convention afterall.
      • kublerross, on 01/12/2008, -2/+2come on, these are corporate spokesrobots, no thinking is allowed!
    • najdorf, on 01/12/2008, -14/+4I thought it was bloody funny actually, but maybe it's just me :D
      They didn't kill anyone, they just upset a bunch of nerds, loosen up dude.
      • magus_melchior, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Then I suppose stealing your identity is a-OK with you. I mean, no one got killed, right?
  • V1ncent, on 01/12/2008, -29/+296This is a signal to the industry - ban the entire Gizmodo crew for life from all conventions as a lesson to discourage other idiots from doing what they did, and their site and owners supported and profited from their hijinks.
    • PSUstoekl, on 01/12/2008, -19/+3You're speaking... 'satorically'.
    • onlyclave, on 01/12/2008, -0/+11And if CEDIA is paying attention Gizmodo won't get passes there either.
  • samard2002, on 01/12/2008, -17/+464A gadget blog got themselves banned from the biggest gadget show in the US? Whoops! Sucks to be them. Hey Gizmodo, I guess the CEA just found the IR port on your website. Maybe next time you'll have the foresight to cover it.
    • codelogic, on 01/12/2008, -1/+26Actually only one staffer got banned but CEA is discussing sanctions against Gizmodo's parent Gawker.
      • dinostabOMG, on 01/12/2008, -2/+6Whoa, way to RTFA. I guess it's too late to effectively bury this article, but the headline is misleading.
    • thefirelane, on 01/12/2008, -2/+15A thousand diggs for this:
      "Hey Gizmodo, I guess the CEA just found the IR port on your website. Maybe next time you'll have the foresight to cover it."
    • DCGaymer, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6www.engadget.com
  • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -125/+21Gizmodo TV shutoff = funniest thing for CES.

    That video will be seen by more people, in more places,
    than all the CES marketing hoopla * 100.

    CES should be paying Gizmodo for the free publicity stunt.

    How about a ''Flash Mob'' for CES 2009 ?
    Everybody bring their TV blockers . . .
    No video - AT ALL - for the entire show ?

    Presenters should be smart enough to place black electrical tape over the little IR ports on the front of the TV.
    Department store displays and other places have been doing this for quite some time, to prevent people from turning off the monitor or changing the channel in the window display:

    http://www.tvbgone.com/cfe_tvbg_main.php

    on the flip side of the coin, if you sell TVs, it would be a nice tool to shut them all down at once at the end of the day. Click - everything off.
    • harlowsmonkeys, on 01/12/2008, -5/+76You are presenting your product at CES. The presentation is being watched by assorted people who *matter*. They can make decisions on whether they resell your product, how much they want to promote it, etc. Your demo mysteriously fails. The people walk away, taking with them the impression that they don't like your product. The fact that for everyone who walked away, 100 or 1000 people on the net will see the video doesn't matter, as those people aren't the people you need to reach. And even if the people who were there later find out you were pranked, that probably won't change that initial negative impression they got of you.
      • Lucent, on 01/12/2008, -2/+15You nailed it. What gave the Gizmodo blogger the confidence to pull such a stunt was the arrogance that CES is put on for them to blog about--that blogs are the primary conduit for informing the gadget-buying public of new toys. If I felt the trade show was put on for me, I'd make noise and brag about stunts with impudence, just like they did. Before the hammer came down, they probably couldn't even imagine being banned. How can you be banned from something you think exists only because you're there to see it? The fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if a few thousand nerds learn about a new gizmo. What matters is whether the rep from Boeing or Circuit City wants to forge a relationship with you based on what they saw.
        • LeeSoong, on 01/13/2008, -2/+1Retail sales channels are dead.

          Christmas sales channels record all time high sales over the internet - retail is dead.

          Stores are for the uninformed consumer, too ignorant to find better deals on the internet.

          http://www.streetprices.com/

          http://www.pricegrabber.com/

          lol, and if you're still shopping at places like Circuit City, you deserve what you get from them.
      • socraticchrist, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Exactly. The Giz audience is not who they need to reach, and there wasn't even a product demo in the video, just Motorola looking like idiots.

        So what publicity do they get? Branding? I think Motorola has a strong enough brand, it's that particular product in that particular moment that they needed to exploit.
    • tristanjh, on 01/12/2008, -26/+7Presenters should be smart enough to place black electrical tape over the little IR ports on the front of the TV.

      I don't think they were expecting people, i.e dickmondo, to start turning off their TV's.
      • fkr3, on 01/12/2008, -0/+30Right. And if you ever get shot it'll be your fault for not wearing kevlar.
        • Acidictadpole, on 01/12/2008, -10/+2I couldn't agree more.
          Although the stunt was rather childish, I don't see how the CES wouldn't have thought this could take place. It seems like common sense to prevent external tampering while displaying your product to such an important crowd (as harlowsmonkeys says). Hope for the best, plan for the worst.
          • fkr3, on 01/12/2008, -0/+10It seems like common sense not to have to. This wasn't a kindergarten convention or a high school assembly this was industry representatives and respected journalists.
    • Matt2k, on 01/12/2008, -1/+28> Presenters should be smart enough to place black electrical tape over the little IR ports on the front of the TV.

      Attendees should be mature enough to not ***** with live presentations. When adults get together, we don't typically worry about bolting every appliance to the ground, you know?
      Look, I've done the universal remote thing before, but even as a kid I wouldn't have done that. Let alone admitted to doing it on my website!
  • sajnikanth, on 01/12/2008, -7/+190Seems like the Gizmodo crew didn't read the fine print when they unboxed TV-B-Gone - "We are not responsible if you get screwed using our product"
    • Professr, on 01/12/2008, -3/+31So being screwed is a definite possibility? *buys entire stock*
  • Okari, on 01/12/2008, -97/+19We all know each and every one of us would have done the same thing if we had the chance.
    • UrlorJkron, on 01/12/2008, -2/+47Speak for yourself.
    • strictnein, on 01/12/2008, -3/+55No. Most of us has some sense of common decency.
    • murakume, on 01/12/2008, -3/+35Okay, I'll have to be honest, I would have turned off a few of the tvs on display, but NEVER would I turn off a tv being used for a presentation like that.
    • DriftAway, on 01/12/2008, -2/+40Maybe when I was thirteen, and it was a public event. But not when you're supposed to be a professional and you're not just representing yourself by your actions. They were in the wrong.
    • twiztidsinz, on 01/12/2008, -18/+5I would have.
    • deadbaby, on 01/12/2008, -2/+35The thing that sucks is bloggers are trying hard to get mainstream credibility and when people do childish stuff like this it really sets the cause back. Plus you gotta think about the guy who set all this stuff up on the floor. Some people take pride in their work and then someone comes in and makes you look like a fool. (I doubt anyone on the floor knew it was a prank) Really just childish all around.
      • dinostabOMG, on 01/12/2008, -13/+1Bah, mainstream credibility is for YTMND.
    • dronkmunk, on 01/12/2008, -0/+9ask me again ten years ago
    • cambob76, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4Not if I was on the job and my behavior directly affected my ability to do that job.
    • naonao, on 01/12/2008, -1/+1I wouldn't have, those guys are ***** idiots.
    • diggerine, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1You must be 10 years old, mentally at least. And no, people older than you won't have done the same thing because they would know better.

      It's called "growing up". Why don't you try it? It's not that bad.
  • thesandreckoner, on 01/12/2008, -22/+223GOOD.
    • davosjh, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0Usual digg behavior is to bury obvious, useless commentary like this…interesting. i wonder what changed this time?
  • RobbyDigital, on 01/12/2008, -11/+163They were asking for it...
  • terencec, on 01/12/2008, -5/+86if someone didn't upload their the video... nobody will know... nobody will know...
    • megarobotguy, on 01/12/2008, -1/+78Bragging about it on your own site isn't very slick either.
    • phoomp, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Yep, they're paying the price for hubris.
  • auricomnet, on 01/12/2008, -19/+77Hell yes! Internet justice! I love it! I hope they pursue further penalties and ban Gawker media as a WHOLE. HQ obviously saw what happened and approved since it went up on the site and they even had time to edit it and add music. So someone in the chain of command obviously saw it.
    • Sandurz, on 01/12/2008, -2/+1Approved it? How hard would it be for any one of the writers to just post something without any approval at all?
    • socraticchrist, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3I like a couple other of the Gawker blogs, but I agree. They have let Giz go on far to long with their bigot editors and these immature antics.
    • magus_melchior, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1As much as I agree with sanctioning Gizmodo, I don't think Kotaku or the others should be affected just because they're also under Gawker Media. Also, I don't think we know whether Gawker was really okay with the stunt.
  • praveenmarkandu, on 01/12/2008, -11/+90banned. rightly so.
  • chris8535, on 01/12/2008, -18/+138Good they deserved it. I mean its a sweeping generalization, but this is just another example of the difference between a blog and actual journalism.
    • cambob76, on 01/12/2008, -3/+12I don't think so. It's just about a lack of maturity and not thinking about consequences. I won't judge other blogs because of this.
    • davidjsmitty, on 01/12/2008, -1/+3"I mean its a sweeping generalization" ... if you have to qualify your statement like that, don't say it. A blog is just a medium, journalism has to do with actually researching a topic. Don't confuse the two.
    • davosjh, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1your generalization swept me right off my feet.
  • digitdean, on 01/12/2008, -26/+120As someone who reads Gizmodo daily, this really saddens me. 358 days out of the year, they're some of the best gadget bloggers out there, entertaining, insightful, and... entertaining. And they turn into jackasses for the most important week of the year and completely ***** both themselves and their readers. I just hope that this isn't the end of the Giz and that they get a chance to smarten up.
    • helliottlaw, on 01/12/2008, -38/+7From one daily Gizmodo reader to another: STFU...ooops they screwed up during CES and got slapped on the wrist..."the end of the Giz"? Please, if you seriously think that a poor PR stunt will end a cutting-edge technology blog like Gizmodo then you need to get your head checked.
      • natenovs, on 01/12/2008, -4/+13that site went downhill with the iphone and the apple tv. its become an apple hype machine and then a bunch of fluff. good riddence i say.
      • digitdean, on 01/12/2008, -2/+9If a journalist's subjects learn not to trust the journalist, then it is the end of that journalist, Gizmodo included. Granted, this is really just the first offense, but it puts them in a position of marked disadvantage.
    • prophetpimp, on 01/12/2008, -35/+2358 days in a year???? Which planet do you live on. Here on earth 1 year = 365.242199 days.
      • omelette, on 01/12/2008, -0/+29hmm, and when you subtract a week, how many days then?
      • Protoss, on 01/12/2008, -0/+16Haha way to not read the rest of his comment.
    • Archipod, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4Agreed..though I doubt this is the end. But it does seem they need to seriously become more sensible about what they do, I thought they would have learned after tubgirling kotaku but oh well...
    • NSResponder, on 01/12/2008, -0/+8As someone who *used* to read Gizmodo a couple of times a week, this pissed me off enough that I've removed them from my bookmarks.

      -jcr
    • phamtasm, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2I agree with you completely. But lately it's all been junk stories about dildos and butt massages that are on there. It's odd for a gadget blog to be so fascinated with stories that are on Fleshbot anyways.

      I thought maybe they are purposefully doing these things to maybe separate from Gawker...but they're probably not that smart. *I've also removed them from my bookmarks.
    • rebotfc, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2All they do is rip other site's stories. They don't blog they steal.
  • colinbrady, on 01/12/2008, -10/+92Am I right in reading that the one staffer is the only one currently banned? If so, they really should ban the entire staff.
    • theaceoffire, on 01/12/2008, -25/+9WHY? One ***** is not enough to ban a corp in my opinion. Just because your co-worker is an ***** is no reason to fire you!
      • fkr3, on 01/12/2008, -4/+33Gawker Media in it's entirety should be banned. The guy was there on their behalf, representing them, and they even felt the need to brag about it on their blog which suggests pretty strongly that they endorsed his actions.
    • secrity, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2One article I read said that further action is pending, the k-linings may not be over.
  • JamesLee007, on 01/12/2008, -7/+237Engadget should like the sound of this.
  • kelp, on 01/12/2008, -3/+44What an idiot, why would he mess around like that.
    • xpankrat, on 01/12/2008, -1/+19He clearly never had his own high-profile presentation f*cked up, leave alone intentionally. He just doesn't know how it feels.
  • kkiran, on 01/12/2008, -5/+54And they thought it was funny.... they published it as if they did a great thing!! Was it a school or a consoritum of large companies?? U deserve it !
    • Dylson, on 01/12/2008, -18/+5HAHA HAI GUIZ I HAZ N IDEEA. LES TAEK DIS REMOET AN TURN OFF ALL DA TVZ. ITLL B FUNNI LALZ
  • Jonmad17, on 01/12/2008, -8/+87I want to say Gizmowned but I'm afraid that I'll get dugg down for lameness.

    But seriously, they were asking for it.It was funny but them ruining a press conference crossed the line.
    • DriftAway, on 01/12/2008, -21/+8More like Gizmondowned.
      • megarobotguy, on 01/12/2008, -2/+9Gizmodo, no N.
        Just copy and paste it from the title if you are having a hard time spelling. Oh, btw, owned?
        • zjordan04, on 01/12/2008, -2/+2I'm pretty sure he was inserting the word "mondo" as in slang for big, huge, etc.
        • Dwebtron, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1agreed
        • PurpleSfinx, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Oh, don't be so sure. Search for Gizmondo.
    • MagicBobert, on 01/12/2008, -2/+1I see what you did there.
    • SLockhart, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1It's crossing the line if you are a journalist or a serious blogger but for a member of the public it's just pure genious. I'm so getting one of those devices.
  • Yaanu, on 01/12/2008, -14/+5I like Kotaku, though...
  • elvenseven, on 01/12/2008, -13/+160Now ban them from digg for spamming.
  • XedLos, on 01/12/2008, -17/+8As Nelson would say: HAAAAHAAA
  • DiggnationViewr, on 01/12/2008, -14/+1HA HA!
  • Kalakov, on 01/12/2008, -5/+45Was it worth it ?
  • ECas123, on 01/12/2008, -21/+5*Pulls out bullhorn* PWNED!
  • BHSPitMonkey, on 01/12/2008, -2/+49Gee, I wasn't expecting THAT to happen!
    • alchemist27, on 01/12/2008, -6/+1/sarcasm ??
    • SlvrEagle23, on 01/12/2008, -5/+3Ohhohooo! You say you not expect that to happen, but really you expect! Ohh yes!

      < /fouad >
  • mulling, on 01/12/2008, -20/+4Banning them is just going to advertise for that awesome TV-killing gadget. So I fully support banning them. I also want to buy the TV-B-Gone. Hurry up an start crankin' em out, China!
    • hiimcliff, on 01/12/2008, -1/+0yea i think im gonna get a TV-B gone also
  • fugazi, on 01/12/2008, -21/+19So now in addition to the Fox boycott I say we go ahead with the Gizmodo boycott!
  • GeorgeStone2, on 01/12/2008, -20/+4***** THE GIZMODO!
    • GeorgeStone2, on 01/12/2008, -8/+2It was a play on ***** THE RIAA. Oh well. WOOSH.
      • akkibaba, on 01/12/2008, -1/+10When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

        Now there's a pun.
  • Jorge777, on 01/12/2008, -6/+32Awesome to hear, they deserve every bit of it and then some
  • Eminemdrdre00, on 01/12/2008, -9/+40Thank God! They deserved to be banned! I wonder if they'll actually post a comment on their blog about how it feels to be banned!
    • Archipod, on 01/12/2008, -0/+10Hopefully not another apology along the lines of Blam's Halo 3 sorry..
  • newaffect, on 01/12/2008, -16/+11That's officially ***** up.
  • danz32, on 01/12/2008, -5/+30They are going to feel awful lonely during next year's show :)
  • DriftAway, on 01/12/2008, -4/+10Go figure.
  • isaactwito, on 01/12/2008, -16/+43Well if CES continues to disappoint then who really cares?
  • analogking, on 01/12/2008, -10/+2Could it be this?

    http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/755e/
  • Vasant56, on 01/12/2008, -11/+1SNAP!
  • wukillabee, on 01/12/2008, -20/+4PWNED@!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    IM TIRED OF THIS LAME ASS BLOGSPAM PIECE OF ***** HITTING THE SITE EVERY 5 MINUTES
  • twiztidsinz, on 01/12/2008, -14/+187Buried as inaccurate -- Gizmodo is NOT banned from CES, only ONE reporter.
    • Swarms, on 01/12/2008, -3/+38For now. They're discussing it further. In my opinion, Gizmodo as a whole should be banned from the conference to discourage other people from abusing their priveleges. How many videos were posted from Gizmodo this week because of their CES coverage? Their site probably gained huge numbers. They made a lot of money covering the conference, and probably cost some companies a lot of money while doing it, or got some unfortunate interns fired.
      • lofiboy, on 01/12/2008, -12/+7I say ban all bloggers from the thing.

        They're not media.
        • JKVM, on 01/12/2008, -8/+9I say ban all lofiboys from Digg.
          They're not people.
    • mudkiller, on 01/12/2008, -2/+23It wasn't just any reporter. It was the Gizmodo Editor Brian Lam.
      • igob8a, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2From Giz page: "[Thanks to Phil Torrone for the gear, video, editing and mischief by Richard Blakeley]"

        I think that means Richard Blakeley is banned, not Brian
  • BHSPitMonkey, on 01/12/2008, -8/+57Actually, this story is inaccurate. Gizmodo isn't banned, the guilty staffer is. FTA:
    "This Gizmodo staffer has been identified and will be barred from attending any future CES events. Additional sanctions against Gizmodo and Gawker Media are under discussion."
    • Kappa00, on 01/12/2008, -2/+21If that is FTA then wouldn't the story be accurate?
    • Nowaiman, on 01/12/2008, -10/+2I THINK HE DUN MEEN THE TITLE HEADLINE
    • aussieNickuss, on 01/12/2008, -0/+21Don't you mean the title of this digg story is inaccurate? The article itself is accurate.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1I meant the Digg "story", not the linked one. Semantics, I guess.
    • likwidfuzion, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest- ...

      The staffer is Richard Blakeley according to Brian Lam's post (see the credits in brackets)
      • NSResponder, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4He's unemployable in the technology press from now on, and it serves him right.

        -jcr
    • stockjones, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4Oh they will be banned.
    • metamorfoza, on 01/12/2008, -0/+7Missleading title? On digg? No way...
    • aelias, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4CES said "Name names, or get *****".
  • Nowaiman, on 01/12/2008, -14/+2I don't think that she deserves it. I mean it *was* phallus shaped, but it was blue, so no. Ridiculous.
  • RobLiefeld, on 01/12/2008, -39/+8The way CES is acting.. you would of thought the staff from Gizmodo had committed a murder. They were just having a little fun... and a little fun never hurt anyone. If anything Gizmodo actually made CES interesting.
    • aussieNickuss, on 01/12/2008, -1/+11Turning off a display while somebody is using that display to make an important presentation, is not funny. On the other hand, turning off the odd display that really only serves as eye candy, is ok. They went over the line though.
      • RobLiefeld, on 01/12/2008, -14/+2I thought it was funny, and I'm sure that guy doing the presentation thought it was a hoot when he found out. Gizmodo made the presentations more interesting... and that's all that matters
        • mhuggins, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5Are you partially retarded, or fully retarded?
          • aussieNickuss, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Well he's 40 years old, so must be.
      • davosjh, on 01/15/2008, -0/+0important presentations are the best kind.
    • josho, on 01/12/2008, -1/+9when you come of age and actually command some purchasing power, you'll find CES interesting.
    • kevin32x, on 01/12/2008, -2/+11i think you fail to realize that ces is a professional environment and not high school. being a rep myself i would have been pissed.
    • whyufail, on 01/12/2008, -6/+4Life! Serious business! Sorry, but the whole ideal of "professionalism" is a laugh in itself. A whole social order based around having a huge stick up your ass.
      • kevin32x, on 01/12/2008, -2/+4It's called getting things done efficiently and effectively. There's a time for to dick around, time to work, and then there's time to grow a dick.
      • magus_melchior, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Post again when you have the resources to slack off the rest of your life, and be satisfied while doing so.
  • puddgomez, on 01/12/2008, -20/+5People will be lame about it but.....I thought it was kinda funny....
  • kwr007, on 01/12/2008, -28/+11Who really took the CES seriously? I mean honestly how is a 150 inch TV a consumer product? Its basically like a high school reunion and who can show up who more. Its already a joke banning somebody? Makes them look like idiots.
  • hiimcliff, on 01/12/2008, -34/+7it wasnt that serious. people need to lighten the f up. i found it hilarious and i hope they lift the ban before next year's ces.
  • neio, on 01/12/2008, -9/+30They should not have bragged about ***** with the screens.
    • Acidictadpole, on 01/12/2008, -0/+8Yea, makes you wonder what would have said that someone just sent them the video instead of it being one of their own.
    • Jordan117, on 01/12/2008, -2/+16Better yet: they should not have ***** with the screens in the first place, especially not during a professional presentation. People's jobs run on that *****.
    • andretii, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1yea, they shouldn't had blog in their blog :(
    • davosjh, on 01/15/2008, -0/+0nobody should brag about ***** with nuthin.
  • Ignited, on 01/12/2008, -13/+7Oh CES 2009 what follys will you bring, i can only imagine. I mean seriously, do you really think Gizmodo will take this lying down? They are like a bunch of five year olds. All CEA did was send them to the "time-out box" I wouldn't be suprised if next year they did something a little more rediculous like bringing signal jammers and such...

    Oh well, like the old saying goes..

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... well damn I guess they wern't joking about the whole being banned thing.

    • rabiddachshund, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Or like Bush's saying goes: "Fool me once, shame on...uh...me. Fool me...um...twice....well you just don't do that."
    • widgetmaker, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1er did you read the article they're banned poss worse they can't go back next year because you don't expect people to act like children at trade fairs.
  • mikesly, on 01/12/2008, -3/+5Looks like I only need to go to Engadget now..
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 219 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.