Categories
"ethics" #gamergate #NotYourShield creepy empathy deficit entitled babies evil SJWs hypocrisy ironic nazis irony alert literal nazis memes milo misogyny

Gamergaters claim credit for Hulk Hogan’s victory over Gawker, recommend suicide to Gawkerites

Hulk Hogan (Gamergate not pictured)
Hulk Hogan (Gamergate not pictured)

Gawker Media has long been one of Gamergate’s favorite villains, and so it’s hardly surprising to see Gamergaters celebrating Gawker’s legal defeat at the hands of former wrestler and very large human Hulk Hogan.

It was a doozy of a defeat, with Gawker Media ordered to pay $115 million to Hogan for posting a sex tape featuring the ex-wrestler and the wife of a friend whose legal name is Bubba the Love Sponge.

On Twitter, Gamergaters cackled like the cartoon villains they are, posting schadenfreude-laden photoshops, ridiculous gifs, rape jokes, and the occasional request that Gawker employees die.

https://twitter.com/x_schilling/status/710969380931248128

https://twitter.com/BobDude15/status/710965368068509696

https://twitter.com/Orlando_223_/status/710993022155100160

One Tweeter brought back this familiar face.

gawkerlost
Remember me?

While the celebration comes as no shock, what is a little surprising is how many Gamergaters have leapt up to claim some kind of credit for a legal victory they had absolutely nothing to do with.

https://twitter.com/Provaporous2/status/710978097135362048

 

https://twitter.com/RedbobBackup/status/711058483248893952

One Gamergate critic summed up the situation with a handy pic:

https://twitter.com/ZombieAteMySock/status/711100188249735168

There were, to be sure, some Gamergaters who were willing to share credit with Hogan, seeing Gamergate as part of a some sort of Media Ethics tag-team.

https://twitter.com/ZanbonSen/status/710989035460648961

Demonstrating the keen sense of ethics she has evidently learned from Gamergate, Minou took a moment off from her celebration to suggest to one games journalist and longtime Gamergate target that he kill himself.

One Gamergater and taco enthusiast offered a rather different take on the relationship between Hogan and the heroes of Gamergate.

https://twitter.com/TerrorTacos/status/711039324725374976

Obviously, there are numerous Gamergaters who are sufficiently connected with reality that they can see that, no, they had nothing whatsoever to do with Hogan’s lawsuit, or the verdict, or the massive judgement. But the victory-claimers had retorts ready for these unbelievers.

https://twitter.com/osc4x/status/711279565314891776

But wherever they stood on the issue of just who was responsible for this glorious victory, Gamergaters seemed to agree on one thing: Gawker employees deserve to suffer for the poor decisions of their bosses.

https://twitter.com/HereticOfEthics/status/711091450763563008

Other Gamergate ethicists suggested that Gawkerites just go ahead and kill themselves.

https://twitter.com/ramzaruglia/status/711026081776570369

https://twitter.com/AgoristArtist/status/711006031413837824

https://twitter.com/Bobcat665/status/711002301813510144

It’s about ethics in telling journalists to kill themselves.

I hardly need to point out some of the blatant hypocrisies here. Gamergate wants Gawker Media destroyed over a sex tape. Meanwhile, Gamergaters posted nude photos of Zoe Quinn all across the internet; they also sent them directly to Quinn’s relatives. Gamergate did much of its early organizing on 4chan, before moving on to 8chan; both sites have reputations as havens for the trading of child porn.

Reddit, which hosts gamergate hub Kotaku in Action, has also been used to distribute child porn and stolen celebrity nudes; the site’s admins were glacially slow in taking action against both problems. Yes, Gawker’s posting of Hulk Hogan’s sex tape was sleazy and wrong and damaging. But 4chan, 8chan, and Reddit have done far more damage to a much larger group of victims. If Gamergate were as concerned as they pretend to be about “revenge porn” — or any kind of porn that is made and/or distributed without the consent of those in it — why are they not trying to shut down — or radically reform — Reddit or 8chan?

That is of course a rhetorical question.

Let me leave you with the creepiest tweet I ran across while writing this post. Once again, here’s Milo:

https://twitter.com/Nero/status/710994606863872000

EDIT: I removed several tweets that turned out to be from a troll account.

EDIT 2: And one more.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

106 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
mockingbird
mockingbird
4 years ago

I’ll echo a few others to say that Gawker’s use of HH’s sex tapes was the height of ick…and that would be true for anyone’s sex tapes / pics / revenge porn.
I don’t know enough about the particulars of the case to say for sure if they “deserved” this judgement (re: the aggrieved being “made whole” vs purely punitive retribution), but hopefully it’ll set a good precedent.

And these guys (GGers)…they’re the worst.

If any of you guys are reading: It’s not cool to be OK with revenge porn for one person / group of people but rage against another’s.

RosaDeLava - Praying for Sexbots
RosaDeLava - Praying for Sexbots
4 years ago

@Paradoxical Intention
Ugh, I’m sorry (especially if I brought back any bad memories). I hope you’re doing well right now.
It’s just that I really don’t get how some people seem so happy about people they don’t like suffering so much. I get a bit of schadenfreude, but feeling positively giddy about people who work for a company you dislike because of whatever they said about your “movement” (I don’t care about GG enough to know who everyone who ever bothered them is/did) killing themselves is just something I have no words for.

Bina
4 years ago

I’m pretty sure there’s a corollary to Rule 34 in that if there’s anything that exists there’s someone who wants there to be porn of it. That being said, I want to call this slash pairing Hogrump.

Actual hogs’ rumps are offended by this comparison. I’m also sure that they smell much better than these two.

I’m still 100% convinced we’ll all be reading about Milo going to jail for major fraud in a few years, based on what I keep reading about his business acumen. I don’t think I’ve seen such a blatantly sleazy, transparently shifty figure in ages.

I’m only surprised it hasn’t happened yet. He really is the poor man’s Drumpf. A wannabe from start to finish, and a never-was the whole time.

Bina
4 years ago

Also, I watched the video in question. About the only thing I can imagine Terry Bollea (such a masculine name!) suing Gawker for is the accurate depiction of him as painfully mediocre in bed.

And this is who they’re worshipping now. It is to laugh…and will be even more so when Gawker gets this quashed on appeal.

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

These guys practice the worst form of journalism

They aren’t a newspaper, they’re a blog. Nobody, whether they agree with the political leanings of Gawker or not, should be viewing them as a newspaper. People these days really don’t seem to know the difference between news and opinion content.

I should also point out that there’s a lot of turnaround at Gawker media. I don’t think any of the writers that are there now were even around for the Hulk Hogan thing. So it’s especially contemptible that they’re being harassed and told to kill themselves over something they didn’t even have anything to do with.

dslucia
dslucia
4 years ago

people who work for a company you dislike because of whatever they said about your “movement” (I don’t care about GG enough to know who everyone who ever bothered them is/did)

Anyone who has ever said something that wasn’t 100% supportive of them or literally parroted from whatever little handout they somehow all manage to copy-paste their arguments from, has bothered them.

And that’s one of the biggest reasons it’s so pointless to try and actually discuss anything with them; they’re perpetually offended at the idea of anyone else being offended by anything, and they’re too intellectually dishonest to actually admit it.

Robert Kelly
4 years ago

Most of the people I’ve been around when it comes to this are actually happy about this. Maybe not that Hogan won, but that Gawker lost. I wasn’t happy, mostly because it’s goddamned Hulk Hogan again.

I swear, if Trump nukes the Earth, it’ll be cockroaches, Brett Michaels and Hulk Hogan left alive, I tell ya.

Redsilkphoenix
Redsilkphoenix
4 years ago

@dslucia:

while also saying that “SJWs” should just go make their own games, and then getting incredibly angry whenever they do because holy fuck, why isn’t this game catering to my straight white maleness)

You are forgetting the unspoken part of that request: the SJW game cannot have any interesting or cool elements in it for it to be a true SJW game. The MC can be nothing more than a word (for example, the word ‘trans’) written in a boring font, and doing nothing more exciting than running about being something other than a cis white male in a Mickey D’s drive-thru. Anything else, like a cool character design or a fantastical setting, is escapism, which is the sole domain of the straight white male, and therefore belongs to him alone. The game with a trans peep running around doing cool things while being trans is theft, and must be stamped out.

Or so it seems to me, anyway.

Redsilkphoenix
Redsilkphoenix
4 years ago

@dslucia:

while also saying that “SJWs” should just go make their own games, and then getting incredibly angry whenever they do because holy fuck, why isn’t this game catering to my straight white maleness)

You are forgetting the unspoken part of that request: the SJW game cannot have any interesting or cool elements in it for it to be a true SJW game. The MC can be nothing more than a word (for example, the word ‘trans’) written in a boring font, and doing nothing more exciting than running about being something other than a cis white male in a Mickey D’s drive-thru. Anything else, like a cool character design or a fantastical setting, is escapism, which is the sole domain of the straight white male, and therefore belongs to him alone. The game with a trans peep running around doing cool things while being trans is theft, and must be stamped out.

Or so it seems to me, anyway. Ymmv.

snork maiden
4 years ago

I’ll chime in with the ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’ sentiment.

Hogan may a risible old git but that doesn’t make it okay to humiliate him in such a way. Revenge porn is wrong in all its forms.

This morning I started reading Gawker’s response, but couldn’t finish it, they way it went on about Freeze Peach made me start thinking of the manosphere. They’re refusing to take down the video, and they’re going to fight it.

I do feel bad for any staff who lose their jobs though.

And as for the question of who Milo doesn’t refer to as ‘Daddy’, I’m fairly certain he doesn’t call his actual father that.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

Can’t say I share in the Gamergators’ jubilation at this verdict. This could have negative implications on the rights of journalists. It’s akin to how I felt about a jury awarding the father of a slain soldier millions of dollars over emotional distress and intrusion upon seclusion when the Westboro Baptist Church picketed the deceased Marine’s funeral. The Supreme Court rightfully protected their free speech rights, and I would hope the same thing happens here. I’m with Gawker on this. I don’t think Gamergators understand the repercussions here.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

At this point they caught sight of thirty or forty crappy clickbait bloggers which were posting on the Internet there, and no sooner had Don #GamerGate laid eyes upon them than he turned to his squire and said, “Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we could have wished; for you see there before you, friends 4Chan and Reddit, some thirty or more censorious SJWs which whom I mean to do battle. I shall deprive them of their advertising, and with the spoils from this encounter we shall begin to masturbate, for this is righteous cultural warfare, and it is a great service to God-Emperor Trump to remove so accursed a breed from the face of the Earth.”

(With apologies to Cervantes.)

KafkaNoMore
KafkaNoMore
4 years ago

Can someone explain to me why it is possible to sue Gawker for posting the sex tape, but it is not possible to sue Reddit and 4Chan for sharing hacked nudes and child porn?

Just because Reddit and 4Chan post stuff uploaded by random people shouldn’t mean that they can’t be held accountable and sued for the illegal stuff that goes on there.

And this Milo conman is a joke! He hasn’t been paying the journalists that wrote for his magazine. But he has the nerves to talk about ethics in journalism?

I suggest that a syndrome/effect should be called after him, the Milo syndrome or effect. It’s definition/s should be:

a) When you hysterically talk about ethics to disguise your own unethical behaviour

b) When your actions in real life are the opposite of what you portray on social media

c) when you (and your followers) fully know that you are a conman, but you (and them) keep insisting that you are not

BringTheNoise
BringTheNoise
4 years ago

@Miss Andry: I have to say I agree. From what I heard pre-verdict, Gawker should win their appeal quite easily… assuming they can find the $50 million for Florida’s “Justice is for Rich People Only” bond.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ miss andry

The Supreme Court rightfully protected their free speech rights

I was less happy about that decision. I’m very much an advocate of free speech; but I do think that the “time, manner and place” qualification should have applied there.

WBC’s actions aren’t about speech; it’s plain old harrassment.

They can yell their opinions from the rooftops for all I care; but to do so at an actual funeral is despicable.

It’s like how I’m content that anti choice advocates can say anything they want, but not at people attending a clinic.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw

Well the facts of the case were such that the WBC was actually obeying all the legal restrictions. They might be a lot of things, but ignorant of the law isn’t one of them. They stayed back the requisite amount of feet from where the funeral took place, obeyed police instructions, and held up placards which the father didn’t see until later when it was on television. If they rushed the funeral procession and started screaming at the mourners it would have been completely different.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ kafkanomore

but it is not possible to sue Reddit and 4Chan for sharing hacked nudes and child porn?

It probably would be possible; but only the victims have the standing to do so.

The victims of hacking would probably have a cause of action under various laws regarding confidentiality and possibly even copyright.

Child porn victims would have these causes and possibly others (there are actions based on emotional distress that amounts to actual mental harm). It’s these victims that I’m especially concerned about (not dismissing the experiences of hacked celebrities, but less of a priority). I recently took some deprived kids around our local court. The judges and the police were kind enough to talk to them. They’d just been dealing with some child porn offences.

Both the particular judge and the officer in the case were very hardened and experienced, but they both said that the most horrible aspect of these cases was recognising the same children ‘growing up’ in the photos from being babies to young teens. These kids endure a decade or more of abuse just to feed a market (and who knows what life they face after they’re ‘too old’ to have value)

dslucia
dslucia
4 years ago

This could have negative implications on the rights of journalists.

Agreed. I was saying that right when I heard about this. Admittedly, I don’t know the US legal system as well as others here might, so maybe I’m wrong when I feel that while it’s possible for this to set a precedent of being against revenge porn (yay!), I figure it’s also possible and perhaps more likely that (especially given the cavalier way women are treated by the justice system, and the fact that revenge porn disproportionately affects women) this just means celebrities will have more sway over journalists/critics.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ miss andry

the WBC was actually obeying all the legal restrictions.

Yeah. Of course they have a disproportionate amount of lawyer in their ranks. There may even be so within in the theory they deliberately try to provoke a violent response on order to be able to use for damages. Personally though I think it’s just the thrill of hate; akin to the most common MRA motivations.

I’m all for people being allowed to say what they want. The flip side of that though is people have a right not to listen. That can be hard to do when you’re ‘pinned down’ somewhere, as at a funeral (or a clinic).

That’s the problem with harassment. It can be subtle. You don’t necessarily have to be screaming in someone’s ear just to get the desired affect. Just knowing the message will get through can be enough. Bit like how people can block Tweets or stay away from websites where people express hatred, but that doesn’t make the underlying hate go away, and just knowing it’s out there can still have an effect.

ETA: I think there’s also a defence between the personal and the general. So, unpleasant as I may find the views, people may be allowed to say “all soldiers deserve to die” or even “all female video game producers” but you cross a line when you single out and identify a particular individual, even though they would be part of that larger group.

Chiomara
Chiomara
4 years ago

@PI
Congratulations on surviving. Keep holding on.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

OT but should you decide to do another episode of Misogyny Theater I documented some interesting rants from Stefan Molyneux.

Portlantonio
Portlantonio
4 years ago

I’m disturbed by all the folks here who seem to think Gawker should have lost the suit. Public figures are different than other individuals when it comes to these sorts of things. It may not seem fair, but it’s necessary for the health of a free press that there be no precedents for a public figure being able to collect damages from bad press when there is no clear proof of malice.

shartheheretic
shartheheretic
4 years ago

In case anyone is interested, Bubba The Love Sponge (nee Todd Clem) was/is a DJ/radio personality who got his start in the Tampa Bay area. His shtick is a rip off of Howard Stern, only more trashy and obnoxious. He was infamous in this area for being a “starf*cker” of sorts, always trying to weasel his way into the lives of local celebrities. He spent many years chasing after, then bragging about, his friendship with Hulk Hogan. He is also well known for getting overly dramatic and plotting revenge over perceived hurts to his feefees (the war of words between him and a former protege went on for what seemed like years). There are many people in the area who think the sex tape situation was a set up by him and his wife to damage Hulk’s reputation for some type of slight that Bubba thought had happened.

shartheheretic
shartheheretic
4 years ago

Bubba is also about 100 times more sexist and misogynistic than Howard Stern has ever been. He’s a grotesque piece of work.

katz
4 years ago

Come on, guys, even public figures have the right to not have people publicly post videos of them fucking. That’s not journalism. Unless you think JLaw’s nudes were also something the public has a right to know about?

The “being a public figure means you cede all right to privacy” argument seems pretty skeevy to me.

RosaDeLava - Praying for Sexbots
RosaDeLava - Praying for Sexbots
4 years ago

@dslucia

they’re perpetually offended at the idea of anyone else being offended by anything, and they’re too intellectually dishonest to actually admit it.

It’s weird, though, because some times they will say things like “I’m triggered by trigger warnings” as, I’m guessing, an attempt to mock “SJWs”, but it really looks like they are upset by trigger warning. Like the thought that someone might disagree with them, or be bothered by something they’re not is so deeply disturbing to these people. It would be hilarious is if it wasn’t for real.

Josh
Josh
4 years ago

@portlantonio

I’m on the fence about it. As I never said anything about how Gawker should have lost, I just said a possible silver lining was it helping shut down revenge porn shit.

Of course, I also feel like the fact that celebrities have to just give up their privacy in any matter is just completely fucked up.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

@katz

I don’t think the Jennifer Lawrence issue is the same as Terry Bollea. For one thing, Bollea has his “persona” as Hulk Hogan, a guy who relentlessly boasted about his sexual exploits. He discussed the affair with Howard Stern and waffled about the existence of a sex tape. He made his sex life a public issue as Hulk Hogan. At that point he’s diminishing his zone of privacy. It’s the same reasoning used by a federal judge who unsealed Bill Cosby’s decade old deposition — Cosby made himself into a public moralizer and, therefore, his comments about giving Quaaludes to women and having numerous affairs.

Unfortunately now Hulk Hogan, as soon as a fraction of his sex tape is posted, is trying to backtrack. Now he’s Terry Bollea the man, not Hulk Hogan the exaggerated character, and has a right to privacy that encompasses the very sex life he boasted about. It’s a little hard to explain, but I’ll link to Nick Gillespie of Reason because constitutional law makes strange bedfellows, apparently.

Suffice it to say, JLaw put herself in no such position. Even Gawker differentiated between the two situations, refusing to post the hacked nudes on its website when writing about the story. Ultimately it’s a balancing act here, and sometimes it’s difficult to know when to air on the side of privacy or freedom of speech/the press. Still more sympathetic to the free speech crowd here, even if one views Gawker’s actions as morally reprehensible.

AsAboveSoBelow
AsAboveSoBelow
4 years ago

In case anyone is interested, Bubba The Love Sponge (nee Todd Clem) was/is a DJ/radio personality who got his start in the Tampa Bay area.

@shartheheretic: Florida author Tim Dorsey’s fictionalized version of Bubba is Boris the Hateful Piece of Shit, which I thought was a much more fitting name for that creep.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
4 years ago

It’s the same reasoning used by a federal judge who unsealed Bill Cosby’s decade old deposition — Cosby made himself into a public moralizer and, therefore, his comments about giving Quaaludes to women and having numerous affairs.

But one’s a court deposition from a serial rapist and the other’s a private sex tape leaked without the man’s consent. Please don’t compare the two for any reason.

Saying that leaking Hogan’s sex tape is okay because he’s Hogan is straying awfully close to saying that, for example, doxxing $MRA is okay because he’s $MRA or assaulting $Asshole is okay because he’s $Asshole – and by “Straying awfully close” I mean “I literally don’t see a difference” – and you know we’re not about that shit here.

I really don’t mean to infight here, but… Come on. Consent is consent and rape culture is rape culture, even if he’s a celebrity, or if he plays a ridiculous public character, or if you just don’t like the guy, or whatever. To say otherwise is, frankly, blaming the victim.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

@Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

But one’s a court deposition from a serial rapist and the other’s a private sex tape leaked without the man’s consent. Please don’t compare the two for any reason.

That doesn’t change my point. The legal reasoning is the same. I know one is rape and the other is a sex tape. I in no way said those two things were equivalent, and I’m surprised any reading of what I wrote could lead anyone to believe that was my point. So please don’t insinuate that I was writing serial rape = a sex tape.

Saying that leaking Hogan’s sex tape is okay because he’s Hogan…

Not what I said. I said he created a public persona where he made his sex life a public issue. It isn’t because he’s a bad person. That isn’t the legal reasoning behind any of this. Even if you disagree with the fact that, legally, we have different standards for public and private figures, that’s simply what it is.

Miss Andry
4 years ago

Of course, I’d be lying if I said I had no qualms about my own position. That being said I don’t want to turn this into some long, drawn out argument/discussion on constitutional law standards. It might be best to call it a night.

Ichthyic
Ichthyic
4 years ago

Not what I said. I said he created a public persona where he made his sex life a public issue

OK, let’s say that’s the case.

Then if this indeed is part of his public image, he still gets to have control of that.

so, even if he wasn’t suing on privacy issues, he could just as easily sue on libel issues.

end of.

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

@Kat: Yeah, pretty much.

@Rosa de Lava: It’s okay, I was just cracking a joke at my own expense a bit.

But really, these GGers couldn’t tell me anything I haven’t already told myself.

As for how I’m doing, I spent hours (from noon to about 5PM) scrubbing walls in the kitchen to get them prepped for painting. I’m tired and things are sore.

But I also made some pulled pork, and I’m relaxing now and I’m gonna go catch up on my YouTubes so that’s good.

Bina
4 years ago

@KafkaNoMore:

I think the answer to your question lies in here, somewhere:

A regular racist family guy who got fired for saying on that same sex tape — according to Radar Online and The Enquirer — about his daughter, yet: “I mean, I’d rather if she was going to f— some n—–, I’d rather have her marry an 8-foot-tall n—– worth a hundred million dollars! Like a basketball player!”

And, “I guess we’re all a little racist. Fucking n—–. …I am a racist, to a point, f—ing n—-s. But then when it comes to nice people and sh-t, and whatever.”

Now that’s a concerned dad!

It was all enough to make a hard man cry. And cry Hulk did-after the settlement was announced.

Meantime, how is it that sportscaster Erin Andrews felt the Internet hate after a jury awarded her $55 million for being violated inside her own hotel room by a man who drilled a hole into the door, videotaped her naked, and posted it online for 17 million to see?

That’s right. A racist lowlife screws his best friend’s wife with the knowledge of his best friend and gets $115 million for distress and an innocent woman is stalked, violated and exposed because of the sloppy security of a huge hotel chain and gets less than half of that and for that she is derided.

Pretty sure the Gits are fapping over Erin Andrews as we speak, when they’re not raging at her being a “crybully”.

dslucia
dslucia
4 years ago

@katz:

Personally, I don’t think the leaking of the tape was okay. It wasn’t newsworthy, and had no reason to be built up as a story.

That doesn’t mean I’m okay with him winning a lawsuit like this, though. I get the impression that some very fine legal lines are being drawn right now, and I’m not sure I’m going to be comfortable with the finished product.

I’ll fully admit that maybe I’m overreacting, of course. I’ve been looking at the worst possible slippery slope outcomes for things very often in the past month or so because of a medical issue, and maybe I’m just thinking things are going to be worse than they really will.

dslucia
dslucia
4 years ago

Double posting because I missed the edit window:
I’ll also admit that I don’t really know of a better way to resolve the situation now that it’s reached this point. Gawker clearly had no interest in capitulating to Hogan’s requests, so… I dunno. The whole thing just leaves me feeling uncomfortable all around. I’ve got no love for tabloid reporting specifically because of events like this, but at the same time I just don’t have a lot of faith in the US justice system as a whole.

Orion
Orion
4 years ago

Miss Andry,

I can’t speak for SFHC, but when I read their comment I thought they were emphasizing the distinction between a deposition and a personal film as much as the difference in content.

A privately-made sex tape is, well, private, unless you willingly publish it. Any personal film is, although obvious a sexual film is more sensitive. Sworn testimony (even at a deposition) is, I believe, public by default. One may be able to get it sealed or expunged or otherwise concealed, but that’s not a right that you have. Testimony is fair game for a judge to use as they find appropriate in a way a personal tape is not fair game for a tabloid.

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
4 years ago

@W.W.T.H.:

They aren’t a newspaper, they’re a blog. Nobody, whether they agree with the political leanings of Gawker or not, should be viewing them as a newspaper. People these days really don’t seem to know the difference between news and opinion content.

They really, really don’t…

It’s absurd how many people will link someone’s personal blog as “evidence” for their argument, even if said person isn’t knowledgeable of the subject or has a clear bias, while nonetheless dismissing viable sources with an often convoluted rationale.

It’s confirmation bias run amok – coupled with intellectual laziness and the effortlessness that comes with being dishonest online.

All that, and unapologetic hypocrisy…as mentioned in David’s post.

Josh
Josh
4 years ago

So, having found out that Gawker is just a blog, I’m even more convinced that releasing the tape was a shitty, shitty move.

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

I’m going to disagree with WWTH here. I think that blogs are journalism, inasmuch as there is such a thing any more.

IMHO any attempt to differentiate blogs from journalism will always result in an attempt to establish established old-media as somehow more noble than new-media. In a time when old-media is both dying commercially and becoming a boot-licking servant of established power, I don’t see this as a valid differentiation.

Given the noises that the White House has been making over the last few years about not believing that blogs are protected by the First Amendment, I think this is an important matter.

In the days of print, pamphleteers and columnists alike were recognised as forms of journalists, whether they tried to be a truthful record of events or simply saw themselves as propagandists. People who worked for Der Stürmer or Socialist Worker were journalists. The Wall Street Journal was journalism, but so was an outlaw neighbourhood zine. “Journalist” has never been a word that’s defined by either respectability or quality, only by a desire to make a living by putting current-affairs nonfiction content in front of eyeballs. In the post-print age the same mindset must apply.

banned@4chan.org
banned@4chan.org
4 years ago

Aww man, I check Gawker almost as much as I check 4chan.

About the only thing I can imagine Terry Bollea (such a masculine name!) suing Gawker for is the accurate depiction of him as painfully mediocre in bed.

Dude, c’mon. Part of the point of all this is he’s not a porn star, and he had no idea he was being taped.

Ddog
Ddog
4 years ago

I agree with Katz and SFHC on this one. I don’t really understand how leaking a private sex tape is OK just because the person boasted about their sex life? Like it seems victim Blamey to me and nothing to do with free speech.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

I am vehemently opposed to sharing sexual images of any person without their consent, regardless of their profession, sexual reputation, fame, or decency as human beings. The only reasonable exception, in my opinion, is if the images are evidence of a crime – in which case, some judgment should be used.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

In England we now have this:

33Disclosing private sexual photographs and films with intent to cause distress

(1)It is an offence for a person to disclose a private sexual photograph or film if the disclosure is made—
(a)without the consent of an individual who appears in the photograph or film, and
(b)with the intention of causing that individual distress.
(2)But it is not an offence under this section for the person to disclose the photograph or film to the individual mentioned in subsection (1)(a) and (b).
(3)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he or she reasonably believed that the disclosure was necessary for the purposes of preventing, detecting or investigating crime.
(4)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to show that—
(a)the disclosure was made in the course of, or with a view to, the publication of journalistic material, and
(b)he or she reasonably believed that, in the particular circumstances, the publication of the journalistic material was, or would be, in the public interest.
(5)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to show that—
(a)he or she reasonably believed that the photograph or film had previously been disclosed for reward, whether by the individual mentioned in subsection (1)(a) and (b) or another person, and
(b)he or she had no reason to believe that the previous disclosure for reward was made without the consent of the individual mentioned in subsection (1)(a) and (b).

It was aimed at preventing “revenge porn” but would probably apply here. You’ll see there’s a journalistic and public interest defence. It’s a common saying in courts here though that “public interest does not mean of interest to the public”. There has to be a legitimate reason (exposing sexual misconduct and the like). You also lose the protection if you’ve previously allowed the images to be used for gain.

It’s a relatively new thing so there’s not a lot of cases yet, other than straight forward revenge porn examples, but there’s no need for the motive to be revenge. You only need show an intention to cause distress; and in English law you are deemed to intend anything that is the natural result of your voluntary actions. You don’t actually need to have wanted the distress to happen.

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
4 years ago

@EJ:

True, blogs can be viable venues for journalism – that’s a very cogent point – but (please correct me if I misinterpret or state anything erroneously) I assumed what W.W.T.H. is referring to is how often blogs that act less like a news source than as a personal platform to deliver one’s opinion are treated as if they are also a viable news source by a troubling amount of people.

Perhaps Gawker wasn’t the best example to use, but I think of one example many here would recognize: Christina Hoff Sommers.

Many people online I’ve come across who reference or cite her don’t know know that she’s basically a spokeswoman for the American Enterprise Institute, which makes her positions on a lot of issues suspect, and she “backs up” her claims with op-eds than any actual studies. These are things that wouldn’t nor shouldn’t be difficult to look up and consider – but, due to confirmation bias and other factors, they just give her the benefit of the doubt.

Some are so convinced, in fact, that linking them those studies will only be treated dismissively no matter how much it’s backed up by evidence. Well, that or made out to be some kind of convoluted conspiracy…

occasional reader
occasional reader
4 years ago

Hello.

Daddies

“He loves them like a fool… Oh Daddies, Daddies Cools !”
Hmm, sorry.

If i read correctly, Hogan had sex with a woman who happened to be the Significant Other of Bubba. So, Hogan had made Bubba a cuck ? Oh, wait, he is not a person of color or a refugee, so that must not be cucking (cuckholding ? I am lost with all those terms), right ?

I agree on the fact that the video, or even the information of cheating may not have been revealed in public (about the information part, at least if it has no consequence on anything else more important) by anyone save the involved persons (as long as all the involved persons agree, obviously. No revenge porn, thanks). It is called “private life” for a reason.

Have a nice day.

Zatar
4 years ago

occasional reader:
I think that you can be a Cuck while being white? When they first used the term it was to refer to insufficiently racist conservatives, but know it seems to mean anyone they dislike.

katz
4 years ago

I understand the possible concern about journalists getting sued for something they reported, but I’m WAY more concerned about the invasion of privacy. I’m deeply uncomfortable with the idea that there’s anything you can do that makes it okay for the paparazzi to invade your sex life.

When my book comes out and you can find my name in Publisher’s Weekly or wherever, you could conceivably define me as a public figure. (If I wrote a mega-bestseller someday and became the next J.K. Rowling, then I definitely would be.) And say, in the interests of helping my young readers, I made a comment in an interview or discussion like “There’s no right or wrong age to lose your virginity. I didn’t lose my virginity until I was 23.” Okay, now I’m a public figure who has made her sex life a matter of public record. Can people make sex tapes of me now?

No, seriously, I want to know so I don’t accidentally cross the line that makes me no longer have a right to privacy.

leftwingfox
leftwingfox
4 years ago

Not a fan of Hulk Hogan or Gamergate either, but yeah, there’s really no public interest being served by releasing a celebrity sex tape, especially since the “compelling public interest” is bragging about the size of one’s genitals.

If this were an illegal act and the film could be considered evidence (I.e. the Cosby deposition or the Rob Ford Crack smoking video), that’s different. I could see a case for something along the lines of Eliot Spitzer, who hired prostitutes while being the DA cracking down on prostitution. Even then, I don’t think the entire thing should be released unedited.