4/25/2023 0 Comments Gawker media wikiWorse, the rest of his colleagues at the site think there is so little wrong with all this that they have been posting a livestream of the trial on their site. Asked about it under oath, when he had every incentive and motivation to present himself as positively as possible, he couldn’t even be bothered to defend himself! There are murderers and terrorists who manage to fake basic interpersonal skills under questioning better than that. An adult editor responsible for a site that draws over 37 million visitors a month considered this appropriate behavior. Daulerio refused to delete the post (until the decision was later reversed). Daulerio (and the Gawker legal team) apparently don’t immediately draw the line for other possible cases of rape. Because in another instance, when the video of a purported rape had been posted on the site, Gawker’s editors responded to pleas from the victim by saying “Blah, blah blah” and Mr. That’s right, Gawker’s former editor claims he only draws the line at the rape of a four year old. Daulerio replied that he might make an exception “if it were a child.” Under what age? 4. In another instance, when asked during the trial whether there were any celebrity sex tapes he would not consider newsworthy, Mr. If you can believe it, that’s just the mild stuff. His reply: “Correct.” Asked, point blank by the lawyer, “Had you known that Hulk Hogan would be emotionally distressed by this publication, you would have still published it, correct?” He replied simply, “Sure, yes” and later, on the stand, claimed that caring about stuff like that was “not his job.” Asked whether he even cared when he posted it if it was actually Hogan in the blurry tape which he had blasted out to the world, Mr. Daulerio was asked whether it was correct to say that any consideration of the human being on the other end of his story never entered his mind. During a taped deposition prior to the trial, Gawker’s former editor A.J. You don’t have to take my word for it-their own words will do. What critics could only begin to try to explain to the public has finally been laid bare: the Gawker Media Empire is rotten with a deep and cancerous sociopathy…and always has been. Over the last few months, and now on videotape in front of stunned jurors and spectators, we’re finally able to see it for ourselves. ![]() Regardless of the outcome of this case, the facts of the trial have revealed without a shadow of a doubt the depravity and avarice that have long driven the Gawker and its sister sites since their creation by Nick Denton in 2003. Would this mean that the stolen peephole footage of Erin Andrews in her hotel room would have been newsworthy if she’d once had a racy interview on Howard Stern or posed in provocative photographs? Or that stolen footage of Sasha Grey would be fair game because she worked in the sex industry? But as a media critic and a human being, I can say with confidence that this is an utterly preposterous argument. I do not pretend to be a legal scholar or to know how the court will ultimately rule. Gawker has tried to claim that the tape was newsworthy because Hogan is famous and has talked about his sex life in public before. First off, very briefly, Gawker is being sued by Terry Bollea, better known as Hulk Hogan, for publishing a sex tape (along with commentary that ruthlessly mocked him) of him sleeping with the wife of a friend in an open relationship, which was recorded without his knowledge. Or you might be unsure why so many people have strong feelings about a collection of websites that cover video games, celebrity gossip and feminism (or why I might have ranted about them in past columns ). If you don’t follow media too closely, you might not know what I’m talking about. But could there be a more appropriate judgment for the selfish and reckless scribblers at Gawker who now await the outcome of a $100 million dollar lawsuit ? Could there be a more fitting end for these young Manhattanites than an absurd, unexpected trial that parades their endless misdeeds in front of a diverse and varied collection of victims who have rightfully pined for their downfall? Of course, those are actually the words uttered by Judge Vandelay from the classic series finale of Seinfeld. ![]() I can think of nothing more fitting than for the four of you to spend a year removed from society so that you can contemplate the manner in which you have conducted yourselves.” “I do not know how, or under what circumstances the four of you found each other, but your callous indifference and utter disregard for everything that is good and decent has rocked the very foundation upon which our society is built.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |