5 ms·
This is still repercussions from Thiel's attack on Gawker. In an ideal democracy partisan billionaires should not have this kind of power over our media.
by downWidOutaFite 3y ago
This is still repercussions from Thiel's attack on Gawker. In an ideal democracy partisan billionaires should not have this kind of power over our media.
- Manuel_D 3y agoBy "Thiel's attack on Gawker", you mean "Gawker's consequences for publishing revenge porn" [1]. If Gawker had published Hogan's sex videos a few years later after revenge porn laws were passed, they wouldn't just have been sued they would have been the perpetrators of a crime. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker
- rmilejczz 3y agoThis really doesn’t change anything about the statement. Peter Thiel had nothing to do with the incident, and utilized it to get them shutdown via the courts. Whether or not it was legal at the time is not relevant to Thiels actions, which were not born from a sense of justice but from a desire for vindication.
- s1artibartfast 3y agoI don't think vindication is the word you were looking for.
- rmilejczz 3y agoYou’re right I should have said “vengeance” but it was early I guess, that’s my excuse anyway
- s1artibartfast 3y agoyeah, I think it makes for a pretty interesting and grey area. Presumably it is in the interest of society to enforce the laws we have on the books, or we wouldn't have them. Presumably we would want justice for Hogan. Im not sure it needs an analogy, but It seems a bit like reporting your neighbor for pouring oil down the storm drain after they piss you off.