• archmagician
    +4

    Shrug, dunno. Gawker gambled on freedom of speech outweighing consenting adults' freedom to privacy and lost. Whenever I read arguments about all this stuff it seems really convoluted. Hogan being a "washed-up racist" or Thiel being a "self-hating billionaire" doesn't seem to bear any relevance at the end of the day. However you view their characters, I imagine their privacy is no less rightful than anyone else's but I'm not versed in the US Constitution and stuff so maybe not. From an outsiders point of view I find the outrage all kind of meh.

    • sashinator
      +2

      I think you mean "right to privacy" and nobody violated Gawker's freedom of speech.

      Freedom of speech is for individuals not to be arrested by the government for criticizing said government's institutions. A for profit publication can be sued in civil court by anyone (including the government) for anything (including privacy violations) and it does not violate anyone's constitutional right to free speech.

      The rest is just internet muddying waters, screaming about free speech in any high profile case of he said she said.