Gawker upset some people when they paid an anonymous source for a personal narrative of an almost one night stand with Christine O’Donell. The justification, published the next day, is a defense for their duty to take down the virginal image of the candidate. But when it goes against journalistic principles of transparency, the credibility if the O’Donell’s anonymous ‘victim’ folds.
I could tell when we first met that Christine was older than me. I was 25, and although I never asked her age, I’d have guessed she was in her early 30s. It was only recently that I found out her real age and learned she was in her late 30s when we hooked up. There’s a 14-year gap between us, but she looks good for her age. I don’t think I’d heard the word “cougar” yet at that point, but that’s probably what I’d call her.
This reads like a frat boy’s fish story (lie) after a failed Halloween barely spent with the landlord’s niece. Gawker, hold back, if her lie is as big as you say it is, it will show. You’re poisoning the waves.
EpiLog 