Hulk Hogan suing Gawker Media for $100 Million USD

Status
Not open for further replies.
So then how do you explain the difference?

SJW's don't care about shit like this when it happens to men.

Jezebel would self-implode if they had the Jlaw nudes up and refused to take it down in the same manner.
cherry picking articles.

here's gawker shaming some female celeb for getting older: http://gawker.com/here-are-some-pictures-of-renee-zellweger-1648827025

here's gawker giving a creeper money to describe the pubic hair of a woman they don't like: http://gawker.com/5674353/i-had-a-one-night-stand-with-christine-odonnell

here's gawker posting leaked nude pictures of a female celebrity that (gasp) jezebel didn't self-implode from because jezebel is a fraudulent website: http://gawker.com/5892533/this-weeks-naked-celebrity-phone-pics-glees-heather-morris
 
cherry picking articles.

here's gawker shaming some female celeb for getting older: http://gawker.com/here-are-some-pictures-of-renee-zellweger-1648827025

here's gawker giving a creeper money to describe the pubic hair of a woman they don't like: http://gawker.com/5674353/i-had-a-one-night-stand-with-christine-odonnell

here's gawker posting leaked nude pictures of a female celebrity that (gasp) jezebel didn't self-implode from because jezebel is a fraudulent website: http://gawker.com/5892533/this-weeks-naked-celebrity-phone-pics-glees-heather-morris

First article just posts pictures of Renee Zellweger with no verbal commentary.

The second article ok.

3rd one ok.

I guess the grand statement here is that Gawker is fucking trash?
 
Oh yeah, here's jezebel putting up a $10,000 ransom for luna dunham's untouched vogue magazine photos, and then showing them off once they get them: http://jezebel.com/here-are-the-unretouched-images-from-lena-dunhams-vogu-1503336657

You know, for empowerment! I'm sure the targeted woman wanted a website to solicit thousands of dollars for untouched photos and display them to millions of people without her consent. Yup! Empowerment. Jezebel totally isn't a fucking fraud of a website that anyone with two braincells would disrespect.
 
cherry picking articles.

here's gawker shaming some female celeb for getting older: http://gawker.com/here-are-some-pictures-of-renee-zellweger-1648827025

here's gawker giving a creeper money to describe the pubic hair of a woman they don't like: http://gawker.com/5674353/i-had-a-one-night-stand-with-christine-odonnell

here's gawker posting leaked nude pictures of a female celebrity that (gasp) jezebel didn't self-implode from because jezebel is a fraudulent website: http://gawker.com/5892533/this-weeks-naked-celebrity-phone-pics-glees-heather-morris

God, this hypocrisy is fucking bonkers. The last link was absolutely as bad as the Fappening leaks, but Gawker editors promoted it because it's what fans would have wanted at the time. They've got no real convictions other than the gospel of capitalism, and would sell their own mothers to stay relevant.
 
Guys you are going to love this: Bubba the Love Sponge is based in Tampa, Florida. He recently got fired from his station. I used to listen to him quite a bit, they had good parody songs. Apparently the show went to shit.

BugBunnyflorida.gif
 
Some news:

http://www.komonews.com/news/entert...BI-in-Hulk-Hogan-sex-tape-case-309930671.html

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A federal judge has ordered the FBI to turn over evidence related to professional wrestler Hulk Hogan's sex tape.

Gawker sued the FBI after it refused a Freedom of Information Act request for the evidence, which could find its way into Hogan's invasion of privacy suit against the gossip site.

I suppose they'll use this to justify that the sex tape was actually worthwhile news or something?

Still seems like they might be fucked considering they ignored a judges orders.
 
Shitty of Gawker and hope they lose but what warrants Hulk a $100m? I doubt he's worth anything close to that.

You sue based on a combination of potential financial harm an emotional harm; Hulk can argue that the sex tape release harmed his future employment or endorsement potential.

Obviously an exaggerated amount meant to fish for a high outcome, but that will probably be their argument. That it did financial harm to him, and also affected him in other ways that he should be given some restitution for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom