So the $200,000 is going, ostensibly, to help the miscreant videographers get the duck out of Fodge, which, let's face it, is a pretty sensible concern after you've exposed a mayor with drug trade connections. Paying sources is not a widely accepted practice in journalism, but if the video is legit, it's hard to argue that this isn't worthwhile journalism...besides the associated health risks, a mayor who thinks he can flout laws that he would have no problem punishing his own citizens with is not a tenable situation for one of North America's most major cities.<p>The self-righteousness of the OP is also just a bit much:<p>> <i>Do you - gawker editors, managers, owners - have ANY IDEA what I could do with $200K? Do you know what kind of lifesaving research that could pay for? Do you know how much fresh fruit that could put in elementary schools in our impoverished neighborhoods?</i><p>Well, considering the OP works in public policy...he/she should know the answers to both: not very much. There's 250,000 students in the Toronto system...even if the target population here is just a few thousand students...$200K would barely buy a year's supply of fresh fruit.<p>The school board is, I'm assuming, outside the jurisdiction of the Mayor's office...and yet mayoral policy could have a great effect, beneficial or detrimental, to the citizenry. Will deposing a ostensibly corrupt mayor fix things? Probably not. But to say such an outcome is not at all relevant to what the OP cares about seems a little short-sighted.