3 ms·

Gawker was bankrupted because they really wanted to display Hulk Hogan's penis, filmed on a hidden camera in a private room, on their website. edit: removed re

Gawker was bankrupted because they really wanted to display Hulk Hogan's penis, filmed on a hidden camera in a private room, on their website. edit: removed reference to violating a court order, even though they did before having it overturned.

ceejayoz 6y ago
That's entirely incorrect. Gawker objected to that court order, and won (https://www.leagle.com/decision/inflco20140117151 https://www.leagle.com/decision/inflco20140117151). > The circuit court's order granting Mr. Bollea's motion for temporary injunction is reversed because it acts as an unconstitutional prior restraint under the First Amendment. There's clear Supreme Court precedent from cases like New York Times Co. v. United States (the Pentagon Papers case) that prior restraint is unconstitutional. They lost the overall case on other grounds.
bsanr2 6y ago
Gawker was bankrupted because they outed a closeted gay billionaire who was publicly, financially supporting anti-LGBT politicians. Said gay billionaire went on a crusade, funding a number of lawsuits against Gawker. Hulk Hogan's was but one of them, and the former wrestler was less concerned about his body being on display than of the video evidence of him calling his daughter's black boyfriend a "fucking nigger" (and before anyone flags me for that word, I use it purposely to drive home the point of which issue Hogan was likely most worried about, by way of their relative responses to that phrase vs the mental image of Hogan's phallus). It should be noted that this billionaire none other than Peter Thiel, who was at one point, after this debacle, affiliated with Y Combinator. To speak to one of the higher up comments questioning the rise of authoritarianism on HN: here you have an example of two public individuals who HN readers are likely to side, or at least identify, with versus a quasi-journalistic entity.

ceejayoz 6y ago

That's entirely incorrect. Gawker objected to that court order, and won (https://www.leagle.com/decision/inflco20140117151 https://www.leagle.com/decision/inflco20140117151). > The circuit court's order granting Mr. Bollea's motion for temporary injunction is reversed because it acts as an unconstitutional prior restraint under the First Amendment. There's clear Supreme Court precedent from cases like New York Times Co. v. United States (the Pentagon Papers case) that prior restraint is unconstitutional. They lost the overall case on other grounds.

bsanr2 6y ago

Gawker was bankrupted because they outed a closeted gay billionaire who was publicly, financially supporting anti-LGBT politicians. Said gay billionaire went on a crusade, funding a number of lawsuits against Gawker. Hulk Hogan's was but one of them, and the former wrestler was less concerned about his body being on display than of the video evidence of him calling his daughter's black boyfriend a "fucking nigger" (and before anyone flags me for that word, I use it purposely to drive home the point of which issue Hogan was likely most worried about, by way of their relative responses to that phrase vs the mental image of Hogan's phallus). It should be noted that this billionaire none other than Peter Thiel, who was at one point, after this debacle, affiliated with Y Combinator. To speak to one of the higher up comments questioning the rise of authoritarianism on HN: here you have an example of two public individuals who HN readers are likely to side, or at least identify, with versus a quasi-journalistic entity.