On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:36 PM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Melissa P <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I dunno. It seems like a "checks and balances" event to me: Act REALLY >> irresponsibly, and someone's gonna come after you. And, win. >> > > Except - no. It is not only a responsible press that gets protected, In > fact, it is the irresponsible press that most needs protection. > > As I argued when this thread first came up, that does not mean that the > freedom of the press is absolute, of course it is not. We have fairly clear > guidelines for what the press can and can not do in this country, and if > Gawker violated those guidelines then they can be punished. >
It turns out that posting somebody's sex tape without their permission doesn't qualify as journalism, for which Gawker was taken to court and punished. The case was bankrolled by a guy they outed, which also doesn't qualify as journalism. Gawker called themselves journalists and were proven repeatedly to not be. And for that they are no more. -- 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.
