Gawker Media - Feat. Kotaku, Jezebel, and Friends

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Watching Nick Denton crash and burn has been so satisfying. There's nothing better than see someone who has nothing redeemable about them get whats coming to them.
 
http://gawker.com/this-is-why-billionaire-peter-thiel-wants-to-end-gawker-1778734026

  • He believes death itself can and should be cheated, and even intends to be cryogenically frozen after he passes away, in hopes that science will one day be capable of reviving him. He literally wants to live forever.
Somewhat related: I guess you should stick to lolcows that are on tugboats and not ones who can literally buy and sell you for meat.

You should certainly take more care hunting big game. However, few billionaires are actually lolcows. Gawker trifled with this guy for no particular reason, and outing people for being gay without some justification is pretty much abhorrent behavior.

The idea that random billionaires can just go around wrecking any media outlet they don't like is pretty disturbing, but corporations have been doing it for profits for as long as they've existed and rich people throwing their weight around is hardly a new thing.

Incidentally, there used to be legal concepts such as champerty, barratry and maintenance that made it illegal to go around stirring up litigation for no valid reason, but these legal concepts are anachronistic now and have been mostly abolished.
 
You should certainly take more care hunting big game. However, few billionaires are actually lolcows. Gawker trifled with this guy for no particular reason, and outing people for being gay without some justification is pretty much abhorrent behavior.

The idea that random billionaires can just go around wrecking any media outlet they don't like is pretty disturbing, but corporations have been doing it for profits for as long as they've existed and rich people throwing their weight around is hardly a new thing.

Incidentally, there used to be legal concepts such as champerty, barratry and maintenance that made it illegal to go around stirring up litigation for no valid reason, but these legal concepts are anachronistic now and have been mostly abolished.

You still need a valid suit. Billionaires can't go around wrecking media outlets unless they do something as mindboggling stupid as putting up celebrity sex tapes in defiance of court orders and making jokes about child porn in their depositions. Besides, this kind of shit has been going on for decades as crowd-funded litigation ; basically every civil rights precedent was set by lawsuits funded by money people donated to the ACLU or NAACP or w/e.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Besides, this kind of shit has been going on for decades as crowd-funded litigation ; basically every civil rights precedent was set by lawsuits funded by money people donated to the ACLU or NAACP or w/e.

Bar associations carved out a specific exception for that kind of funding. Public interest organizations are basically exempt from the usual rules for having non-lawyers run things, directly soliciting clients, and raising money for litigation, pursuant to NAACP v. Button and other cases. It's essentially a public interest exception.

The shadowy rich guy hiring people to sue his enemies thing is kind of different. Someone wealthy enough can spend anyone into the ground eventually, whether they're right or wrong.

Gawker helped out by being absolutely repulsive. If anything, they're the poster child for anyone who wants to argue this isn't that terrible a thing.
 
The shadowy rich guy hiring people to sue his enemies thing is kind of different. Someone wealthy enough can spend anyone into the ground eventually, whether they're right or wrong.

That's true whether they fund a proxy litigant or lay suit themselves. Justice is already for sale to the highest bidder, and always has been, so what difference does it make?
 
How disappointing. Instead of holding yellow/gold star journalism responsible they're trying to protect it.

I don't think that either party cares about that. Is more disappointing read editorials that reads like gawker articles in other publications.
 
Some more info

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gawker-bankruptcy_us_575af205e4b0e39a28ad7152?j50yiljgo9lfcx47vi
Gawker Media has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

The company listed its assets as between $50 and $100 million in the filing and said its liabilities were between $100 million and $500 million.

In March, a Florida jury awarded former professional wrestler Hulk Hogan $140 million in damages after Hogan sued the media company for publishing excerpts of a video showing him having sex with the wife of his then-best friend. Gawker is appealing the decision.

Recode reported that the bankruptcy filing is an effort to prevent the company from having to pay out the damages. Gawker currently has a $100 million bid from Ziff Davis but is hoping for a higher offer, Recode reported.

I've attached the bankruptcy documents in PDF format
 

Attachments

tumblr_nreno0duJh1td0of9o1_500.gif


You reap what you sow.
 
Although I like that idea, It would be funnier if it became a legit news site that doesn't play into ideological bullshit or celebrity crap and just focuses on the facts.

Nah, that's the wrong approach. Objectivity is better than just reeling off statistics and dates. If new gawker was objective that would be a massive improvement .

That probably wont happen though so lets celebrate their downfall.

articleLarge (1).jpg
 
Moral of the story: don't out a gay billionaire who isn't really a public figure with the only reason being to build more clout as a bully.
 
Back
Top Bottom