We recently spoke with Gawker‘s Jessica Coen.

Described by the New York Times as “the national go-to spot for keeping up with the rich and scandalous, the media elite and the pop-culture trends of the moment,” Gawker is one of the most popular sites in the blogosphere. The snarky, widely read gossip blog recently entered a major distribution deal with Yahoo! as well.

On Thursday, December 15, we’ll have Jessica Coen live at the 92nd Street Y in an appearance with Forward editor-in-chief J.J. Goldberg.

After the jump, Jessica Coen discusses Gawker, getting sued by Fred Durst and all things Jewish-y.

Describe Gawker for someone who’s never heard of the site before. If you were to sit down a random person, not media-savvy, who has no familiarity with blogs at all, how would you describe what Gawker does?

Gawker is your basic weblog—a website featuring links and commentary, with items posted in descending chronological order. But unlike people who keep blogs as diaries or for personal use, Gawker is a business venture. We update around 24 times a day, have advertisers, and in October had around 6 million page views. We focus on Manhattan media and gossip, aiming to aggregate all the various items floating out there into a daily digest of watercooler gossip.

What were the best and worst experiences you’ve had at Gawker so far?

Breaking that Condi Rice was shopping at Ferragamo (to the dismay of other customers) during the height of New Orleans’ post-Katrina crisis was pretty significant to me. I’m well aware that Gawker revels in its frivolity, but it personally felt wonderful to comment on something that held a greater relevance.

The worst experiences have for the most part been personal. Having Fred Durst retract his lawsuit against us (we had “mistakenly” shown his sex tape, which caused severe emotional and ocular damage) was rather painful—I felt like a failure. If I can’t even get sued properly, what good am I?

Do you think that the print media “gets” Gawker? Do you feel that the clashes Gawker has had with print columnists and writers are due more to a feeling of competition or a fear of the new?

Depends on which print luminaries we’re talking about.  For the most part, I’d like to (perhaps naively) believe that if someone is regularly reading Gawker, they must “get” our tone and angle. But I also know print media folks are still busy figuring out where things went wrong with Judy Miller, so far be it from me to expect that they understand whatever it is that I do.

As for the root of our invaluable clashes with our comrades in print (and, for the record, I’d like to say that I love each and every tiff we’ve had, no one more than another, as if they were all my precious little scuttlebutt children), I’d venture that a “fear of the new” ultimately leads to a sense of competition. I don’t necessarily think of Gawker as in competition with print (it’s impossible on several levels), but I think some print outlets have felt threatened by the site. And if they’re not exactly threatened, they’re certainly irritated. Which means I’m doing my job.

What are your feelings on the recent explosion of celebrity magazines such as the stateside OK! and In Touch?

Personally, I find the magazines hilarious—their “stories” are often comedic genius—but I doubt most of the readers love these publications with such irony. That being said, it’s a little scary how many brightly colored fluff magazines are out there, and how they have the power to completely create a beast like Paris Hilton.

You’re speaking as part of our Breaking News in the Jewish World and Beyond series. How do you define your own Jewishness? Is it more of a religious or cultural identity to you, or neither?

This is always tough for me, but I’d say neither. I’m only half-Jewish—and on my father’s side, to boot. I wasn’t bat mitzvah’d, nor was I baptized. I grew up in a home where I lit the menorah and trimmed the tree, and I’ve been involved in the traditions on both sides of my family. Personally, I’ve never been one much for organized religion, and I’ve always considered myself little more than a casual hybrid. So to be mentioned in The Forward and Heeb is a surprise to me; sometimes I feel as if I’ve been culturally co-opted. Which is a good thing.

The same lecture series includes a member of Congress (Rep. Barney Frank), a senior editor at the New Yorker (Hendrik Hertzberg) and a Pulitzer-winning New York Times writer (Tina Rosenberg). You’re 25 years old and originally moved to New York to attend graduate school at Columbia. How did it feel to become such a prominent figure so quickly?

Obviously, it’s a little weird and surreal—but, truthfully, I don’t really buy it. If sitting at home in my underwear, bitching and babbling as I please, makes me “prominent” (and not, as I believe, an utter lunatic), I can only blame you for paying attention to me.

You went to college in Michigan and worked as an English teacher in Los Angeles before editing what may be the quintessential NYC media and gossip site. What are your favorite aspects of New York now that you’re here?

It’s hard to answer the question without sounding like a gushy neophyte, so I’ll go ahead and gush: I love New York’s energy, its potential. In such a compact swell of humanity, anything truly can happen. As jaded as the city can make you, it still manages to inspire. I love the balance of the anonymity and the familiar, mundane and insane.

Tickets are currently available for Jessica Coen’s conversation with J.J. Goldberg. What are you sitting there for?