Gawker sucks as an entity. I hate Denton and think he's a sleazebag. All I'm saying is that, as a competently run, money making enterprise, they aren't going to publish something that opens them up to a libel suit.
I should note that I went to Journalism school and have worked as a reporter, so I'm familiar with media law.
I don't see anything in that story that would be worth a lawsuit. It doesn't matter if something defamatory is implied, which this story barely does - not to mention attributing it to a third party via a quote. You need to prove actual malice - not meaning intent to harm (because that's impossible to prove) but working knowledge that the facts were wrong or that it was published with absolute disregard for the truth. It's not enough to show that a story caused harm - if it's true then it's fair game.
