On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Joe Hass <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since you went there: > > The New York Times reported that a co-founder of PayPal covered the entire > legal expenses for Hogan in that suit, basically trying to sue Gawker out > of business after another Gawker-owned blog outed him several years ago. > The tip off was legal maneuvers behaviors that were not consistent with a > traditional strategy of trying to capitalize the amount of cash obtained in > a victory. > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/25/business/dealbook/peter-thiel-is-said-to-bankroll-hulk-hogans-suit-against-gawker.html > > You can think Gawker is a piece of shit. You can think Gawker is the > future of journalism. But if the increasing frequency of rich companies and > people using the cost of a lawsuit to bully members of the media into being > nice story tellers doesn't terrify you from a purely oligarchical > standpoint (even though we're already there), I would unironically play the > "wake up, sheeple" card. > > I actually have no moral dilemmas about rich people spending money to thwart click-bait whores. I don't consider them to be journalists by any definition, so if the rich are somehow able to shut them down, there are worse ways for them to be spending their money. -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
