3 ms·
> fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta a precedent that if you engage in trashy t
by serge2k 10y ago
> fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta
a precedent that if you engage in trashy tabloid "journalism" and egregiously invade people's privacy that you can end up sued into oblivion?
Sounds like a perfectly reasonable precedent.
- fatbird 10y agoThe precedent isn't about the quality of your journalism, it's "get a billionaire angry, get sued into oblivion". That's what scares people. Mother Jones nearly faced the same fate for very good journalism.
- nostrademons 10y agoDon't forget the part about publishing a sex tape without knowledge of the party involved. Mother Jones won their lawsuit, because the statements they published were both true and in the public interest. There is a very large difference between what Gawker did and what Mother Jones did, and the judgments reflect that.
- fatbird 10y agoMother Jones won but nearly went bankrupt in the process of defending itself, and bankrupting Gawker by legal fees was always Thiel's plan--that's why he was funding a variety of lawsuits against Gawker, not just Hogan's. If one came home, as Hogan's did, it just hastened the day.
- jdmichal 10y agoThat's a problem with the legal system that's not tied to journalism at all. It could happen to any company or person at any time. As long as the case looks to have enough merit to avoid dismissal, then rack those legal costs up! The only precedent related to journalism here is that journalists doing illegal things is still illegal.
- ambicapter 10y agoIt actually is about the quality of the journalism though, as the point was the "reporting" (gossip and 'mean girls'-esque harrassing) turned out to be illegal. Was Mother Jones accused of >illegal< reporting?
- fatbird 10y agoMother Jones won on the merits of its journalism, but still nearly went bankrupt defending itself. Winning is the faster version, but Thiel was funding several lawsuits against Gawker to bleed them dry--takes longer, but works just as well. And remember, a legal victory isn't over until the appeals are complete. Gawker collapsed before exhausting its appeals--again, financial exhaustion, not moral defeat.
- gohrt 10y agoNo, there is absolutely nothing illegal about trashy tabloid "journalism". Only the particular form of privacy invasion was at issue here.
- serge2k 10y agohence, "and"
- vithlani 10y agoWell if this is a reasonable precedent, why not apply it against the Murdoch tabloids -- papers that do actual, real harm? Like you know... hacking missing (and dead) girls' voicemail, leading to her parents getting false hope. Now that would be a good precedent. This is just billionaire bullying -- power of money and twisted law. And it is not just Theil behind this.