-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NYTimes: Peter Thiel (Paypal) Is Said to Bankroll Hulk Hogans Suit Against Gawker
- Thread starter Tripon
- Start date
- Status
outunderthestars
Banned
I hate to be the one who breaks it to you, but a great numbers of lawyers are paid by people who have no direct connection the the case at hand....
This too.
lmao I didn't know refusing to take down a sex tape after being order to and outing homosexuals against their will was journalism.
reggieandTFE
Member
- Donald Trump delegate
- Donates money to James O'keefe
- Brings down tabloid news website because they don't grovel at his feet
But presumably, without the third party backing, HH wouldn't have the money to pay for the lawsuit and Gawker would be getting away with it - money would be influencing the legal system either way. This way is better.
The trial was pure quality entertainment. Not surprised someone was willing to pay for it.
I'd assume it's more about them outing him.
Hot Coldman
Banned
I feel sorry for the well-meaning staff of Gawker's tertiary sites set to lose their jobs because Nick Denton never matured past high school.
This Thiel guy doesn't sound any better. Hell, he sounds worse. But why poke the bear.
This Thiel guy doesn't sound any better. Hell, he sounds worse. But why poke the bear.
This is incorrect. Every single one of those sites started as a Gawker Media site.
Gawker has never acquired sites, only sold them off at times.
Fleshbot is not a Gawker Media site anymore. They spun it off because advertisers were uncomfortable advertising with a company that ran a porn blog and had links to it on their parent site.
I believe Denton still owns it, but under another company's banner.
Flying Toaster
Member
Bad situation all around but claiming Gawker was a news site is a freaking farce.
They never followed journalistic integrity. They never worked stories that had merit. They capitalized on situations and thought they were above court orders...
Name another News organization that is run the way Gawker is? Fox news although batty at times wouldn't even do 1/10th the shitshow Gawker actually does.
They never followed journalistic integrity. They never worked stories that had merit. They capitalized on situations and thought they were above court orders...
Name another News organization that is run the way Gawker is? Fox news although batty at times wouldn't even do 1/10th the shitshow Gawker actually does.
andythinkpad
Member
In that case It's no different from Kotaku being brought by company XYZ and going bankrupt 6 months later due to unrelated economic downturn.
Did the Kotaku staff getting screwed out of their 401k package or something?
Again, that's incorrect information. Kotaku has always been a Gawker Media site. As has io9, Lifehacker, Deadspin, Jezebel and Gizmodo.
Gawker Media has never bought a site, only sold them.
BUNTING1243
Banned
even if you hate gawker, this seems like a really fucked precident
Also saying gawker media never put out any worthwhile stories is just ignorance at a certain point. Their culture enahled garbage like the outing story but is still good people there doing good stuff.
Also saying gawker media never put out any worthwhile stories is just ignorance at a certain point. Their culture enahled garbage like the outing story but is still good people there doing good stuff.
Eh, the why and how is pretty important in this case.
Tabloids needing to employ some standarts in terms of privacy is just fine.
Basileus777
Member
What precedent? Do you think this is the first time a rich man has paid someone else's legal fees with an agenda? It's actually far less sinister here because the rich man in question is a former victim of Gawker's disregard for ethics.
Yeah, Gawker would be fine of they had not done awful shit.
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
http://gawker.com/reports-tech-billionaire-peter-thiel-secretly-bankroll-1778549060
That's right. You just read Gawker refer to themselves outing him as "writing critically of Thiel".
This is great journalism.
That's right. You just read Gawker refer to themselves outing him as "writing critically of Thiel".
This is great journalism.
Given Thiel's actions would have achieved nothing if Gawker hadn't been performing a number of unlawful actions this solicits nothing more than an "and?" from me.
Gawker are hung out to dry because they behaved terribly several times and are subsequently vulnerable to legal action.
Gawker are hung out to dry because they behaved terribly several times and are subsequently vulnerable to legal action.
Peter Ian Staker
Member
letthemfight.gif
They're complete scum. Trying to disguise their invasion into people's personal lives as some kind of public service.
Thiel is a visionary. He's eccentric, but he's an incredibly innovative, brilliant guy.
Gawker is probably the most toxic and loathsome media company in the world. He's doing all of us a favor here.
SecretMoblin
Member
wait what lol
plenty of filthy rich people also dedicate huge chunks of money and time to genuinely good causes, not all are one-dimensionally evil
And plenty of outlets have written critically of Thiel in the past. He bankrolled this case because they violated the law and had a history of violating him. There are any number of extremely wealthy people who have all sorts of media grudges; this isn't evidence of a chilling effect on the free press.
The Albatross
Member
It's not like Thiel or Hogan have been pioneers in going after news sources for libel, like this is some landmark libel case... It isn't. This is fairly cut and dry case of libel and extortion, and Hogan's case is being backed by somebody who also had his personal life affected by Gawker so that Gawker could make more money. There is no slippery slope here. The law has been the law for a century on these issues.
Nobody should feel queasy that cash is influencing the legal system when dirt rags like Gawker don't follow the law, out people, write libelous articles, blackmail the people in their articles, and then profit from it.
Gawker is in the business of making money off of hurting people personally... Publishing their sex tapes, extorting them for money to prevent something from coming out, and outing famous people as homosexuals when the people aren't ready to come out yet. That's their profit engine: slander, libel, extortion, and personal attacks. The Koch brothers aren't watching this case to go after the New York Times editorial board because the New York Times profit motive isn't Gawker's profit motive. There is no analog here.
This. I learned one very important thing from journalism courses/part time job at a paper, and it is this:
There are two kinds of journalists: the kind that consider the moral and ethical quandaries of their work, and the kind that dont care who they hurt as long as they get readers. Gawker was the latter and they deserve 0 sympathy.
BronsonLee
Member
I'll drop this in here since this seems like the new thread for this stuff
Judge Campbell denies Gawker's motion for a new trial. She will not reduce the $140m damages at all. #hulkvsgawk
Judge Campbell denies Gawker's motion for a new trial. She will not reduce the $140m damages at all. #hulkvsgawk
RedAssedApe
Banned
like something from a movie
Strangelove77
Member
Good. Fuck Gawker.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
SneakersSO
Member
In the state of Florida, you have to pay a portion of the original award before you can appeal. Gawker has said that the portion of the $140M they'd have to pay is so large they'd need to liquidate the company in order to do so. So this is basically over.
They'd have to put a fuckton of money into a holding account or something during the appeals process, basically enough to kill them.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Hoo boy. Man. I feel sorry for the legitimately good people working at the company :l But Gawker is pretty shitty....and Thiel helping Hogan out isn't surprising, seeing as how Gawker outed his sexuality way back when.
"Gay person getting payback against assholes at outed him against his will" kind of is though.
Also it's not like this is a hostile takeover. This is the law.
I have no ill will or good will for Gawker, they could close tomorrow I wouldn't even bat an eye but that you can have a billionaire basically get to destroy a news media because he didn't like them is a bit...19th century I'd say.
If we're going about shutting down shitty journalist outlet, we can start with cable news.
If we're going about shutting down shitty journalist outlet, we can start with cable news.
I don't understand how this became a situation of Thiel somehow destroying Gawker at whim simply because he's rich.
What happened was Gawker kept doing shitty things, slipped up and opened themselves up to a lawsuit, which Thiel subsequently acted upon by helping Hogan. It's not some super rich aggrandizement of power. It's just someone with means taking advantage of a lawful opportunity to get back at a group of idiots fetishizing airing out people's personal lives under the guise of "news and public interest"
Netherscourge
Banned
I bet he pulled off his mask and it went down like this:
1. They are not a "news media"
2. They can only be "destroyed" because they did something they can be sued for - and lose.
If you remove Thiel from equation it's doubtful we get to this situation.
I'm not arguing on the value of the lawsuit, Hogan rightfully won if I had an issue with that I would be commenting on the relevant thread.
1. You don't get to decide if they're news media or not, they're absolutely not worse than whatever shitty rag you can see this side of Walmart that pass for news. If National Enquirer gets to be called news, Gawker is certainly not worse.
2. That's not the point.
Heck as far as I'm concerned this quote is enough to get them to close :
.
If you're under the jurisdiction of the judge ordering you to do something, this is the stupidest defense line ever.
The National Enquirer never published a sex tape, they never publicly outed someone and they sure as shit have never helped someone commit blackmail against someone they had a personal vendetta against. Gawker is beyond the pale in terms of their actions, they've been unethical since day 0 and have broken the law more than a few times.
The only shocking thing about all this is that Hogan is the only one suing them.
The only shocking thing about all this is that Hogan is the only one suing them.
Hari Seldon
Member
That is some Count of Monte Cristo levels of revenge there lol.
As long as they delivered some news they're part of the news media.wikipedia said:
they're shitty news media that engage in illegal behavior but they're still news media.
That doesn't give them cart blanche to do what they did though. There's a reason no one else does the kind of shit Gawker does, because it opens the door to this.
Where did I say that?
I described them as news media because they're in that business, how successful they are at this and how some people (because otherwise they would have folded already) view them change nothing.
e: my issue is with the major difference in court outcome depending on the money you pour in the system.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked