hey gawker dudes. what the fuck is wrong with you?

I just don't get why a guy who is so haunted by the concept of individual freedom decided to attack fucking Gawker. It's like OKAY FREEDOM IS FINE AS LONG AS YOU TAKERS DON'T OFFEND PEOPLE WITH MORE RESOURCES THAN YOU. if you wanted free speech you should have acquired the resources to pay for them, since the two are obviously intrinsically linked through the logic of the legal system.

how is this a big deal, if this blog goes under can't they just start... another blog? it's not hard, blogspot.com boom, gawker 2

I'm not sure that's what the proprietor of Talking Points Memo was worried about when he wrote that it was a big deal.

you can write whatever you want on the internet, it's "open source" and they cant sue you b/c you can use a 'scrreen name' or 'avatar'.... soooooo?????

zzz / *jerk off hand motion* at all the hot aired grandstanding and PEOPLE JUST DONT CARE ABOUT BEING A GOOD PERSON IN THIS SPCIETY ANYMORE trenchant social commentary itt. this war off attrition between two rich dudes with differentially deep pockets was a darkly hilarious twist to a morally queasy trial and raises some thorny questions about what freedom of the press /really means/ *takes bongrip* but do we have to go full guy-seated-next-to-hot-girl-in-polisci-101 with the DEMOCRACYS OVER THE RICH WON BECAUSE WE DIDNT CONFISCATE GUY WHO OWNS 10% OF FACEBOOKS WEALTH?? we're all 40 y/o old dads here

shit i Thot zing ate that post gah

*shits*

im not sure hatred of rich dudes is the way you wanna approach this. I'm a spineless gawker Stan but just to take the oppo perspective, he's a rich dude who outs people and harasses barely-public figures and uses the legal leverage afforded by his wealth to get away with it. Only it's 'media' so that's ok... U know?

That's not the oppo perspective - you can be against both and still be far more concerned about Thiel.

on the other hand, equitable access to our legal system should be a concern regardless of this zillionaire shitshow

Which is why the stuff about "freedom of the press" is semantically important - go that route and we can't tell Sheldon Adelson to fuck off and die, we have to listen when rightwing nutbags yell about free speech when racists and homophobes get shouted down.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, May 26, 2016 9:48 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well yeah. if you play the "shut down ideas you don't like" game then the people with the most resources win. i.e. thiel. the point is he's suppressing speech thru wielding the courts. and because of how society is organized that's always gonna be a situation where people like him are better situated than others to do so. so.... maybe it isn't the right way to operate, like in general?

but also enormous gulf between "i yell at someone using my own speech" and "i bring legal action with the intent of destroying someone's speech". its only in thiel's interest to confuse the two.

(and there's the hypocrisy i keep harping on where the former, which is in the realm of everyone to do, is considered verboten, while the latter, which is only available to the few, is justified as "well its legal, eh?")

i like the *bongrip* one better

http://adage.com/article/media/gawker-exploring-sale-hulk-hogan-lawsuit/304202/

Lol

kickstarter anyone?

I'll put in $100

Just need 1,399,900 more donors!

the dark souls board game raised 5 million, stranger things have happened.

jesus this is like the doges vs the medicis or some shit

http://nypost.com/2016/05/27/ebay-founder-backing-gawkers-appeal-of-hulk-sex-tape-verdict/

Two Silicon Valley billionaires with a history of bad blood are squaring off over Gawker.

Pierre Omidyar, an eBay co-founder, is leading the charge to support Gawker in its appeal of a $140 million judgment awarded to Hulk Hogan, whose lawsuit was bankrolled by rival billionaire and PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, The Post has learned.

http://nypost.com/2016/05/27/ebay-founder-backing-gawkers-appeal-of-hulk-sex-tape-verdict/

Lmao

michaeljacksonpopcorn.gif

let's be clear about what "backing" means tho

“First Look Media is looking into organizing amicus support for Gawker in its legal fight and appeal against Hulk Hogan,” Lynn Oberlander, First Look’s general counsel, exclusively told The Post.

By filing the amicus briefs in support of Gawker, First Look could effectively elevate the trial into a First Amendment rights case by pitting Thiel against dozens of media organizations — many of which are owned by other billionaires.

organizing some amicus briefs is not the same thing as footing the bills

Thiel and Denton jaeger battle

team revive racket teen?

Any searches for "bryan singer allegations" in the news this weekend relate to Depp. Could use some Defamer in 2016.

http://variety.com/2016/digital/features/gawker-traffic-political-websites-1201785316/

That makes sense. Now that the presumptive nominees are settled and anyone who hasn't made up their mind on who to vote for is completely disengaged anyway, there's not much domestic political coverage I care to follow.

Concur re Defamer though

i miss trashy gawker

like i used to just scroll past headlines and cackle at the discusting "American Grotesque" (as Cook or Pareene called them in one of those internal memos) stories... now it's like

Former Employees Call Trump University a "Façade" That "Preyed Upon the Elderly and Uneducated

*gasp* a façade, you say? shocked just shocked &c

You want a trump sex tape? Because that's how you get a trump sex tape.

X-post

That's what this election is missing

hi flopson

sup

Wouldn't a Trump sex tape just be him discussing how gorgeous this woman is he's about to bang and how amazing he is at the sex and how yuuuge his dong is without ever actually following through on any of his braggadocio?

Either way, I don't want it to exist.

The $60,000 hair weave story was funny on a meta level, like you want longform investigative journalism? We found out where Trump's hair comes from!

I miss the dumb criminal stories on Gawker.

http://gawker.com/the-free-speech-peter-thiel-will-defend-faggot-faggo-1779486823

dying at Gawker responding to a bond villain with "your friend said faggots before Bill Clinton was in office — GET READY FOR THE SHAMING OF A LIFETIME"

running an ad for a THE 25 MOST BEAUTIFUL FEMALE POLITICIANS listicle, with a photo of some tits in parliament, halfway down the page helps shore up the moral high ground

http://gawker.com/heres-what-gawker-media-does-1779858799#

was there an easier way to present this information. perhaps make it more similar to a Buzzfeed listicle

kinja sucks

Cool dead baby pic on your front page, you douchebags. Thanks for saving me a trip to rotten.com.

Photo is credited to the Associated Press ffs, grow up.

Same photo appears on Slate, Voice of America, NY Post, The Sun, The Daily Mail, and ABC News.

Okay, all grown up now and surprisingly okay with randomly happening upon photographs of drowned infants. Thanks for the advice!

It's a newsworthy photo taken by a legit photographer that appeared on plenty of mainstream news outlets. Dinging Gawker for also publishing it -- and comparing it to Rotten.com in the bargain -- is just nonsensical histrionics.

Like if your ish is with the photo, take it up with the AP, not Gawker.

In fairness, I'll extend the criticism to all news media: your photographs/videos of dead people/people being killed may be newsworthy and serve a purpose but put up some fucking barriers that require someone to willfully seek them out instead of making them a fucking sensationalist welcome mat.

Thank god R. Budd Dwyer did his thing thirty years ago.

The daily mail did it too!

Don't clutch your pearls so tight, might strain a tendon.