(The ill-advised decision by former Gawker editor A.J. Hogan is banking on the jurors being so turned off by the gleeful scuzziness of the Gawker post that they'll look past the basic First Amendment questions and focus on how gross it would feel to have a sex tape of yourself put on the internet. If Hogan was trying to win a defamation suit, he probably wouldn't have a shot.īut Hogan is claiming an invasion of privacy, a hazier concept that leaves Gawker at significantly more risk. If you start putting curbs on that, you imperil the ability of all journalists to do their jobs. In legal terms, "public figure" plus "true" usually equals "let's go home" where journalism is concerned. The post Gawker published about him was true. The sex tape's existence was already public knowledge screenshots had even been published. Hulk Hogan is a public figure who has discussed his sex life in public. The headline read, "Even for a Minute, Watching Hulk Hogan Have Sex in a Canopy Bed is Not Safe For Work but Watch it Anyway." Hogan promptly sued the site for $100 million.įrom Gawker's perspective-and, really, from the perspective of almost any journalist out there-this is a straightforward First Amendment case. The post reveled in the prurience of what it was publishing. Gawker case is a 2012 post Gawker published showing a short excerpt of a sex tape someone made of Hogan having sex with someone else's wife. Thursday's session featured one of the more laughably poor showings from a so-called "expert witness" that you're likely to see, but before we get to that, some background.Īt issue in the Hogan v. Journalism is a broad church, encompassing both the regal and the rancid, and sometimes you're going to find yourself having broad constitutional arguments over some very questionable material. Contact Laura C.The Florida trial happening this week pitting wrestler Hulk Hogan against the website Gawker may seem a bizarre venue for major questions of First Amendment rights and journalistic principles, but so be it. Times staff researcher Carolyn Edds contributed to this report. "Hulk Hogan's retirement will be comfortable," Denton wrote Wednesday. "I think the jury definitely got it right when they made that assessment."ĭenton no longer runs Gawker's former network of websites, but he has written about the case on his own personal website,. "If we consider this to be newsworthy," she said of the sex tape, "then basically the concept of newsworthiness would then lose all meaning. But Franks doesn't think the case will impact media companies with "journalistic standards." Some have raised concerns about the implications the Gawker case for the press and the First Amendment. "There wasn't financial capacity or probably the spirit to go on," she said. Mary Anne Franks, a University of Miami law professor who has written about the Gawker case, said she wasn't surprised to hear about the settlement. "The jury verdict might have been overruled, but on the other hand, had it not, that could have been detrimental for the news industry as a whole as to what is or is not newsworthy." "It may not be such a bad thing, because this was a risky case," he said. Gawker's defense told the jury that Bollea's lawsuit threatened the First Amendment and its protection of free speech. In 2012, Bollea sued Gawker in Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court for violating his privacy after the New York gossip and news website posted a video of the retired wrestler having sex with the wife of his former best friend, Tampa DJ Bubba the Love Sponge Clem.ĭuring the two-week trial in March, Bollea's attorneys portrayed Gawker as a website run by writers who failed to consider the privacy rights of their subjects. The settlement won't be final until it's approved by a federal judge, however. In a statement, Bollea's attorney, David Houston, said "all parties have agreed it is time to move on." "Beautiful day at our beach brother," Bollea said in a tweet Wednesday. "It is a great day for Terry Bollea and a great day for everyone's right to privacy," Thiel said in a statement Wednesday. "The saga is over."ĭenton was referring to Silicon Valley investor Peter Thiel, a co-founder of PayPal and one of the first investors in Facebook, who reportedly spent millions to fund Bollea's lawsuit - a revelation made weeks after Gawker lost the case. "After four years of litigation funded by a billionaire with a grudge going back even further, a settlement has been reached," former Gawker CEO Nick Denton wrote on a blog post Wednesday.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |