5 ms·

"The free press" is rather a grandiose title for a rag like Gawker. If Gawker counts as part of "the free press" -- the people Americans trust with the privile

by eudox 10y ago

"The free press" is rather a grandiose title for a rag like Gawker. If Gawker counts as part of "the free press" -- the people Americans trust with the privilege of mediating their access to much information -- then yes, "the press" deserves whatever it gets.

RockyMcNuts 10y ago
"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech."
- eudox 10y ago
  Denton and the people in his employ have their right to free speech, and Hulk Hogan has the right to use the beautiful system of Anglosphere common law -- certainly the best legal system in the world -- to deal with Gawker's poison. (Goebbels and Stalin is a bit too hyperbolic, I think. Maybe try and scale it down -- say, Joe McCarthy.)
  - TAForObvReasons 10y ago
    > Goebbels and Stalin is a bit too hyperbolic Parent was quoting Noam Chomsky
  - ikeboy 10y ago
    >certainly the best legal system in the world Citation/argument needed
  - RockyMcNuts 10y ago
    so...no objection to any billionaire with a grudge starting a secret trust fund for anyone to use to to sue you? I love liberty as much as the next guy, but libertarianism all too often seems to mean the liberty of the guy with money and power to mess with the little guy. Seems a little weird that a self-professed libertarian like Thiel aligns with Trump, noted authoritarian who's not above calling for violence against those who disagree with him, wants to go after Jeff Bezos and Amazon because he doesn't like what the Washington Post says, calls the CNN control room to tell them what to cover, while at the same time threatening to cancel CNN's 'FCC license' and take them off the air. Personally, if a boot is stomping on my face I'm not that concerned with whether it's a private boot or a public boot. I'm not cool with government telling the press what to print, and I'm not cool with large capital pools going on secret vendettas against media that doesn't do what they want, and making sure they get sued on any completely unrelated thing that comes up where they might be vulnerable.
- ElComradio 10y ago
  Gawker is not liable for publishing a story about Hogan's sex tape. They are liable for publishing the actual explicit sex tape without his consent.
- EdiX 10y ago
  I agree 100% but is someone else's sex tape speech? It doesn't inform the public of anything it needed to know and it doesn't express an opinion.
Spooky23 10y ago
Unpopular and distasteful speech is the entire purpose of press freedom and free speech. Keep in mind that while many people would agree with you that Gawker is scum, various communities take offense and find tasteless all sorts of other things. Freedom is either near absolute or useless.
- eudox 10y ago
  I keep that in mind. And this court decision was not made on the basis of how repugnant, malicious or vicious Gawker or Nick Denton are. If Gawker goes bankrupt, it won't be because they're horrible people, it will be because they overstepped the bounds of the law.
  - zorpner 10y ago
    No, it will be because a plutocrat decided to fund a lawsuit unrelated to his reason for disliking them (and apparently influenced the process of that lawsuit with the aim of destroying Gawker to the detriment of Bollea), and abused the inherent bias of our courts towards parties with disproportionate resources. Bollea may well have had a valid case against Gawker, but we'll never know. The idea that a case with a side funded by a vengeful billionaire could be fairly decided in our court system is absurd.
    - eudox 10y ago
      Dude, my dude, Thiel just paid for part of Hogan's legal fees. That money's not gonna conjure up evidence from the luminiferous aether.
      - FireBeyond 10y ago
        The issue is that Bollea dropped a part of the lawsuit that would have allowed the award to be paid out by the insurer - that reduces both the likelihood and amount of money that Bollea will receive, on the face of it, acting in a manner contrary to his own best interest, and in Thiel, lawsuit financier's, stated interests.

by eudox 10y ago

RockyMcNuts 10y ago

"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech."

eudox 10y ago
Denton and the people in his employ have their right to free speech, and Hulk Hogan has the right to use the beautiful system of Anglosphere common law -- certainly the best legal system in the world -- to deal with Gawker's poison. (Goebbels and Stalin is a bit too hyperbolic, I think. Maybe try and scale it down -- say, Joe McCarthy.)
- TAForObvReasons 10y ago
  > Goebbels and Stalin is a bit too hyperbolic Parent was quoting Noam Chomsky
- ikeboy 10y ago
  >certainly the best legal system in the world Citation/argument needed
- RockyMcNuts 10y ago
  so...no objection to any billionaire with a grudge starting a secret trust fund for anyone to use to to sue you? I love liberty as much as the next guy, but libertarianism all too often seems to mean the liberty of the guy with money and power to mess with the little guy. Seems a little weird that a self-professed libertarian like Thiel aligns with Trump, noted authoritarian who's not above calling for violence against those who disagree with him, wants to go after Jeff Bezos and Amazon because he doesn't like what the Washington Post says, calls the CNN control room to tell them what to cover, while at the same time threatening to cancel CNN's 'FCC license' and take them off the air. Personally, if a boot is stomping on my face I'm not that concerned with whether it's a private boot or a public boot. I'm not cool with government telling the press what to print, and I'm not cool with large capital pools going on secret vendettas against media that doesn't do what they want, and making sure they get sued on any completely unrelated thing that comes up where they might be vulnerable.
ElComradio 10y ago
Gawker is not liable for publishing a story about Hogan's sex tape. They are liable for publishing the actual explicit sex tape without his consent.
EdiX 10y ago
I agree 100% but is someone else's sex tape speech? It doesn't inform the public of anything it needed to know and it doesn't express an opinion.

Spooky23 10y ago

Unpopular and distasteful speech is the entire purpose of press freedom and free speech. Keep in mind that while many people would agree with you that Gawker is scum, various communities take offense and find tasteless all sorts of other things. Freedom is either near absolute or useless.

eudox 10y ago
I keep that in mind. And this court decision was not made on the basis of how repugnant, malicious or vicious Gawker or Nick Denton are. If Gawker goes bankrupt, it won't be because they're horrible people, it will be because they overstepped the bounds of the law.
- zorpner 10y ago
  No, it will be because a plutocrat decided to fund a lawsuit unrelated to his reason for disliking them (and apparently influenced the process of that lawsuit with the aim of destroying Gawker to the detriment of Bollea), and abused the inherent bias of our courts towards parties with disproportionate resources. Bollea may well have had a valid case against Gawker, but we'll never know. The idea that a case with a side funded by a vengeful billionaire could be fairly decided in our court system is absurd.
  - eudox 10y ago
    Dude, my dude, Thiel just paid for part of Hogan's legal fees. That money's not gonna conjure up evidence from the luminiferous aether.
    - FireBeyond 10y ago
      The issue is that Bollea dropped a part of the lawsuit that would have allowed the award to be paid out by the insurer - that reduces both the likelihood and amount of money that Bollea will receive, on the face of it, acting in a manner contrary to his own best interest, and in Thiel, lawsuit financier's, stated interests.