<i>It was a natural post. Twitter disasters are the quickest source of outrage, and outrage is traffic. I didn&#x27;t think about whether or not I might be ruining Sacco&#x27;s life.</i><p>That&#x27;s Gawker for you. They never care for the people they write about, they only care for the clicks. Just like when they outed the CFO of Condé Nast: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;17&#x2F;gawker_drags_media_coverage_to_a_new_low_outing_an_executive_just_because_they_can&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;17&#x2F;gawker_drags_media_coverage_...</a><p>And who could forget the time when they filed the sexual assault of a guy under &quot;first world problem&quot;: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;f0ZbV" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;f0ZbV</a> (archive link because no traffic for Gawker).