Hi, please

Is Gawker Stalker irrelevant?

When the Gawker Stalker map came out, it made a pretty big splash. (See the Jimmy Kimmel YouTube video from my previous post to see how some celebrities were very angered about this.) These days with Twitter and now FourSquare, Forbes.com asks, “Who needs prying gossip magazines when pop stars twitter away their own privacy?”

The website CelebrityTweet! has a great tagline: “Stalk celebrities on Twitter!”  It has a long list of celebrity user names aggregated on the site.  So I ask my question, is Gawker Stalker now irrelevant if celebrities are giving away their own locations anyway?  Or does Gawker still provide some value because of the editorial commentary on the site?

Similar Posts:

One Comment

  1. mushon 19:47, Feb 6th, 10

    An interesting pointer to addressing this issue can be what we talked about during the last class – the question of: “What is the bargain?”.
    On Twitter the celebs are choosing to geotag their location. On the street they don’t. It’s true that the street is a public space but the attributes of public data online are different.