Bye Bye Gawker? Jury awards Hogan $115mil in Gawker suit

RT @annamphillips That's $115 million just for compensatory damages. Jury wants to award punitive as well #hulkvsgawk

THERE'S MORE MONEY COMING HOLY SHIT

Damn Son.......
You fucked up when HULKHOGAN is seen in the right.

Can Gawker pay that tho?

that's a shitload of money, brother jack dude

Think that's just worded wrong. It's $55million in lost business and $60m in personal damages or something

It's good to see they have some morality left though, and have a line they won't go over.

Jurors in Hulk Hogan’s sex video trial on Wednesday heard a videotaped deposition of Gawker’s former editor in chief — saying he’d draw the line at posting the sex tape of a celebrity who is under 4 years old.

A.J. Daulerio, 41, was sitting ramrod straight in the Florida courtroom during the awkward moment when he was asked on video by Hogan’s lawyer, “Can you imagine a situation where a celebrity sex tape would not be newsworthy?”

Daulerio answered flatly, “If they were a child.”

“Under what age?” attorney Charles Harder asked.

“Four,” he said.

“No four-year-old sex tapes, OK,” Harder said.

Wait.

Congratulations, you piece of shit.

not going to miss gawker at all. That whole network sucks ass.

By Enron Go To Postnot going to miss gawker at all. That whole network sucks ass.

I like Deadspin a lot, but I find the rest of the network pretty gross, especially after that Conde Nast exec thing last year.

even deadspin grosses me out sometimes. The only person im worried about at Gawker is Doug Demuro over at jalopnik, but he's good (or rather funny enough) to get a job elsewhere.

I wish I had a live feed of Sheik's reaction to this.

He's not Hollywood Bullshit Hulk Hogan. He's the real.

Fuck you, Gawker. :)

Chances are nothing will happen to the Gawker network in general, though. They will pay out over a 10-15 timespan.

fuck another dude's wife and get paid brehs

By Omzz Go To Postfuck another dude's wife and get paid brehs

this is all a reward for hating black people

I enjoy the occasional deadspin and kotaku visit. Eh oh well.

Gawker itself is sub trash though

By Omzz Go To Postfuck another dude's wife and get paid brehs

Be a racist who wore a bandana to court and get 140 mil brehs

By BertramCooper Go To PostI like Deadspin a lot, but I find the rest of the network pretty gross, especially after that Conde Nast exec thing last year.

Eh, only select Deadspin people. I think Marchman and Petchesky are great, and Diana Moskovitz is superb. But dudes like Tom Ley and Kevin Draper and Billy Haisley can kick rocks.

Denton published a response. Thought he made some good points.

http://gawker.com/the-hogan-verdict-1766460791

The only thing that is chilled by the court's decision is the publication of private videos of sex taken without someone's consent.

By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostBe a famous racist who wore a bandana to court and get 140 mil brehs

FTFY

I don't really care if Hogan sued because the tape made his racism public and altered his career, I don't like the precedent set where someone can be video taped without their knowledge (or with it even) in the buff/during sex, then it sold/procured to/by a media outlet to be published. Their defense of such a breach of privacy was stupid shit. There wasn't any transparency of a public figure here, it was just paparazzi garbage through and through.

I am not even going to say he didn't deserve money. He did. However giving that piece of shit 140 million is disgusting. Its pretty clear they hooked the local celebrity up with more money than he asked for. His lawyers thought 100 was enough and they decided to bankrupt the company and now he'll probably see 15-30 when its all done. That amount is ridiculous, and doesn't even fulfill the goal of giving Hogan actual money.

Somebody on that other site made a perfect statement. The avg wrongful death award is 3 - 4 million but Hogan got 140 mil because the world got to see him be racist and fuck his best friend's wife.......

In an ideal world because of what he's doing on the tapes and his general odious nature the millions would instead be given to various charities.

Hulk Hogan’s secret financial backer was revealed this week to be Peter Thiel, the billionaire co-founder of PayPal who was outed as homosexual by Gawker. The Times reports that Gawker argued that Thiel was new discovery material, but the judge refused to look at articles involving his involvement. Thiel reportedly put up $10 million for Hogan’s legal team to work on the case, and has held a grudge against Gawker for outing him in a 2007 article titled “Peter Thiel is totally gay, people”

Thiel told the Times this isn’t about revenge, but a way to stop Gawker from “bullying” people.

“It’s less about revenge and more about specific deterrence,” Thiel told the New York Times this week, after it was revealed that he was funding Hogan’s case. “I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest. Even someone like Terry Bollea who is a millionaire and famous and a successful person didn’t quite have the resources to do this alone.”

After the news broke, Gawker CEO Nick Denton penned an open letter to Thiel on his website, saying that Thiel’s “revenge has been served well, cold and (until now) anonymously.”

“You [Thiel] admit you have been planning the punishment of Gawker and its writers for years, and that you have so far spent $10 million to fund litigation against the company,” Denton wrote. “Charles Harder, the Hollywood plaintiff’s lawyer who has marshaled your legal campaign, is representing not just the wrestler Hulk Hogan on your behalf, but two other subjects of stories in suits against Gawker and its editorial staff.”

Fuckery!

The kind that's amazing.

Thiel is awful and I hope Gawker survives. They occasionally overstep the line but they have some fantastic sites in their portfolio and do a lot more good than harm.

I'd rather Gawker not survive and that kind of toxic journalism they do be put to bed as a result. From the ashes the people who aren't shits over there should create a better company.

I think the precedent that Thiel's victory would set is far more terrifying than Gawker continuing to publish snarky takedowns of celebrities and politicians.

Besides, from what I've read Gawker is likely to win on appeal, but Thiel's strategy doesn't depend on the cases ultimately being successful. He hopes to snow Gawker under with so many lawsuits they can't afford to continue operations. That's bullshit.

The courts should be able to settle the claims, set precedent, and distribute awards without the undue influence of an outside party.

Hell no, fuck Gawker. I don't care if Thiel is an awful person, they shit all over him and violated him just like they do with other people, destroy lives to get a scoop. I don't care if their other sites "do good". Burn those motherfuckers to the ground.

I'm gonna need more examples of Gawker "ruining lives."

Why did they out the guy? Why is that a thing? Why is the headline 'x person is totally gay' a thing? They did 'x person is totally straight' headlines?

Who gives a shit about who fucks who?

By rvy Go To PostWho gives a shit about who fucks who?

There are entire tv channels, magazines and websites devoted to it.

By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostThere are entire tv channels, magazines and websites devoted to it.

Well, yeah. I'm just saying.

This is not journalism. This is trash. No sympathy for Gawker.

It's first amendment-protected "trash."

The court system should be allowed to decide these cases on their merits, and not be used as the cudgel of a petty billionaire to snow Gawker under through sheer force of economic power.

Many of the anti-Gawker comments remind me of comments from those who have no sypathy for those on death row. This isn't about whether the person or company is likeable, it's about constitutional principles and how we want our government processes to function.

Most people don't give a shit about constitutional principles.

Hard to really give a fuck when George Zimmerman can go on to be a celebrity or white kids can kill people and get off free because affluenza. They don't really seem to matter to begin with so why should we care

Most people don't, but conscientious citizens should.

Just because injustices are done elsewhere doesn't mean we should say to hell with the whole American experiment.

I can't believe people are actually defending Gawker in this Hulk Hogan business.

By Enron Go To PostI can't believe people are actually defending Gawker in this Hulk Hogan business.

The press is given extremely wide latitude in reporting on public figures, which includes celebrities.

I like it this way. There should be a heavy, heavy burden for public figures to show that they've been defamed or slandered. Without this protection some stories wouldn't reach the light of day because the publication would be afraid of getting sued.

I find that Gawker can be distasteful at times, but this really isn't about how likable Gawker is. Now that Thiel has entered the picture, it's about whether the mega-rich should hold even more power than they already do. If a billionaire is determined enough, he can push a media company to the brink out of personal spite even if cases aren't decided in his favor.

That is terrifying to me. Especially with folks like Thiel and his fellow Randroids who think of themselves as above us plebs.

Gawker has done many really underhanded shit. Shit that's not really journalism in the slightest.

Outing people as gay isn't their "Right". It's not news. It's not anyones business.
Outing that someone goes to hookers isn't news. It's not Gawkers "right".

They've done both. And they've done them specifically to people who have "jilted" gawker in some way. Using their media reach to go after individuals they wanted to attack cause reasons.

I'm sure a quick google on the topic will bring several examples to the fore, I can't remember specific details, but i can remember the general stories, and Gawker were extremely fucking shady in all of them.

So, the fact that it all came back to bite them in the ass ... meh. It was going to happen.

Thiel hasn't done anything here other than bankroll Hogans costs. The case was still Gawker v Hogan. But Gawker weren't just going after some minor celeb with no real bank roll in this case.

Vionding to Gawker specifically trying to go after them, for petty bullshit reasons
Columbia Journalism Review in the Gawker vs Theil history.
CJR review, at the very bottom of the page, of Gawkers public ousting of someone trying to meet up with gay hookers. (which leaves out some of the perosnal history involved)
A collection of stories about "news" gawker has been publicl slammed for and should probably never has posted.

I'm not saying that they don't have some value in the industry. Or that they should be "censored for taste reasons". But they quite regularly step over the line reporting personal information that isn't news worthy and has no public value at all. The reasons for doing so can be left to your own imagination than my insinuations.

By giririsss Go To PostGawker has done many really underhanded shit. Shit that's not really journalism in the slightest.

Outing people as gay isn't their "Right". It's not news. It's not anyones business.
Outing that someone goes to hookers isn't news. It's not Gawkers "right".

From everything I've read Thiel was openly gay and didn't hide that fact from anyone, he just hadn't "announced" it. The post was about how his homosexuality does or doesn't affect his business prospects in such a supposedly tolerant industry.

So, the fact that it all came back to bite them in the ass … meh. It was going to happen.

Thiel hasn't done anything here other than bankroll Hogans costs. The case was still Gawker v Hogan. But Gawker weren't just going after some minor celeb with no real bank roll in this case.

Except he *has* done more than bankroll Hogan's costs. Hogan in fact specifically waived the right to receive payment from Gawker's insurance company, a very unusual move he likely would not have done without the promise of essentially limitless funds from Thiel.

The same goes for all of the other plaintiffs Thiel is funding. It's unknown how many of them would have been able to proceed without his help, and the merits of their cases are almost beside the point.

He has made public statements knowing that if the public knew he was bankrolling Hogan's suit, it would decimate the value of Gawker, because it isn't about the merits of the case: it's about having a virtually infinite war chest to litigate.

We already have a system civil litigation for cases in which Gawker stepped over the line, which they undoubtedly have at times.

Thiel is using that system in an incredibly cynical way because Gawker dared report on him and on his cronies. If we value free press and free expression as a society (and I assure you Peter Thiel does not) he has to be stopped.

"I don't like Thiel's politics so I will cast my lot with Gawker who violates people's privacy willy-nilly for clicks"

Fuck that shit, and fuck Gawker right in the fucking goat ass. I hope they fucking wreck them.

By KingGondo Go To PostFrom everything I've read Thiel was openly gay and didn't hide that fact from anyone, he just hadn't "announced" it. The post was about how his homosexuality does or doesn't affect his business prospects in such a supposedly tolerant industry.

I haven't time to comment on the rest right now. But this is ... forcing a square block into a round hole.

I haven't read the original article, but Thiel didn't make his sexuality party of his business. Which should be respected. Cause it's not part of business.

If they wanted to do a piece on homosexuality and a "supposedly educated and tolerant" industry, why did they have to name someone who has never brought their sexuality to the table?

They didn't.

They could have used a hypothetical. Used someone who had agreed to be named. But no, they chose to disregard someones privacy, put their (the writer / editor's) personal judgement / choice above everyone elses rights, and just name him.

That's why it's terrible journalism, and over stepping the bounds. It had no forethought for the consequences to the individual, or if it did, certainly not positive intent. Just a cavalier "i have this knowledge so i'm going to tell/sell it to millions".

And so i'm certainly not one for using mass litigation as a tool, like you assert (I haven't read much about how many others / their cases). That's terrible in general for society. But Gawker have certainly brought it upon themselves by going after peoples private lives when there was no need.

Now, if this was just ALL business, and Thiel was mad that Gawker reported about them breaking some anti-trust law, or privacy guidelines etc... i'd be right there with you.

The solution to Thiel feeling that his privacy was violated is to sue them himself, but he didn't. Why? Because his case would have almost certainly been thrown out because of incredibly broad 1st Amendment protections for the press.

Instead this ardent libertarian is using the state's own legal mechanisms to try and destroy the company. That is so dangerous it simply shouldn't be legal, but I'm not even sure how a legal challenge would be mounted against the practice.

Again, it has nothing to do with Gawker's likability and everything to do with principle. Gawker was already under enough strain with the Hogan case, which should act as incentive for them to be more careful in the future. That's how the system should work.

By KingGondo Go To PostThe solution to Thiel feeling that his privacy was violated is to sue them himself, but he didn't. Why? Because his case would have almost certainly been thrown out because of incredibly broad 1st Amendment protections for the press.

Instead this ardent libertarian is using the state's own legal mechanisms to try and destroy the company. That is so dangerous it simply shouldn't be legal, but I'm not even sure how a legal challenge would be mounted against the practice.

Again, it has nothing to do with Gawker's likability and everything to do with principle. Gawker was already under enough strain with the Hogan case, which should act as incentive for them to be more careful in the future. That's how the system should work.

It would be one thing if Thiel was bankrolling a marginal or frivolous lawsuit, but he's not. It's 100% legit and kind of a slam dunk. Your protests against this are coming off as purely political, since you never fail to mention the dude's politics in every one of these posts. How is this any different from someone contributing to someone's legal defense fund? Essentially it's the same thing, except for the amount.

I don't really see Gawker giving a shit about being careful long as they remain intact tbh. Did you read some of the transcripts? Those fucking assclowns think they're so edgy that they treat being questioned by an attorney like they're a 13 yr old in the principal's office who thinks they're clever.

The Hogan suit will likely be tossed out upon appeal. The media is typically given a wide berth to report on public figures. But as I've said before, that's almost beside the point. Thiel just needs cases with enough to get to a court proceeding, then he can bleed Gawker dry regardless of whether the suit is ultimately successful or not.

For Hogan to claim that his privacy was invaded when he was aware he was being recorded comes across as incredibly disingenuous. It's much more likely he didn't want the parts of the tape in which he used the n-word being played, with good reason since he was effectively erased from WWE after that part came out.

And yes, politics come into it because Thiel thinks of himself as above the rest of us. This is a direct result of his worldview.

For Hogan to claim that his privacy was invaded when he was aware he was being recorded comes across as incredibly disingenuous

Your post is justifying revenge porn.

That isn't what the Hogan tape is from everything I've read.

Every couple that makes a private sex vid is aware that they are being taped, but that doesn't justify the publishing of private videos such as that legit. It would be opening the gates to revenge porn, which there needs to be actual laws to protect people from.

Also, media defending Gawker and by extension revenge porn are displaying how truly shit-heap the media has become.