Gawker bankruptcy splits media on free press, due process

“Gawker’s bankruptcy could be a sign of what’s to come if Donald Trump is president,” the Washington Post’s Callum Borchers warned.

But conservative reporter Sarah Rumpf countered, “There is a big difference [between] Hogan suing Gawker for publishing a private sex tape & Trump seeking retribution against critical reporters.”

“Bankrupting Gawker over a grudge isn’t justice. It’s censorship,” read the headline to a Guardian op-ed authored by Nicky Woolf.

The Federalist’s David Harsanyi wrote in a note dissenting from many in the press, “It’s worth once again pointing out that the trial was okayed by judge, the verdict was rendered by a jury, and the decision was upheld by a circuit judge. In no sense does this suit fall under the concept of ‘frivolous.'”

Gawker’s bankruptcy filing came after a jury awarded Hogan a total of $140 million in March in his invasion of privacy lawsuit against the gossip blog. In 2012, one of Gawker’s brands, Deadspin, uploaded a surreptitiously recorded sex tape featuring the wrestler and his former friend’s now-ex-wife.

The jury’s first ruling awarded Hogan $115 million. One week later, the jury awarded him an additional $25.1 million in punitive damages. The release of the video, which was reportedly recorded by the husband of Hogan’s former paramour, resulted in the wrestler splitting with his wife of 25 years, Linda Hogan.

But it’s not the lawsuit that has many in media worried. It’s that PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel paid for it.

Thiel admitted last month that he put up nearly $10 million to bankroll Hogan’s sex tape lawsuit. The tech billionaire, who Gawker outed as gay in 2007, explained that his reasons for supporting the invasion of privacy lawsuit case were personal.

For many in media, Thiel’s legal involvement in the case sets a dangerous precedent.

“What happened to Gawker could happen to any media company without a billionaire backer,” said the Week’s Ryan Cooper. “Any journalist celebrating this is a damn fool. You now work at the mercy of a bunch of deluded power-mad narcissists.”

The New Yorker’s Nicholas Lemann argued elsewhere, “The Gawker case may be only the first in a string of lawsuits that unleash a generation’s worth of resentment against the uniquely legally privileged position of the American press, at a moment when the press is far more vulnerable, economically and culturally, than it used to be.”

“Journalists and their lawyers ought to be arming themselves for a protracted war,” he added.

The Next Web’s Bryan Clark opined, “I hate Gawker, personally, but when billionaires control the message, we’ve all lost.”

Even politicos got in on the action Friday, as New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman warned that the lawsuit bankrolled by Thiel posed a threat to free speech.

“Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of our nation. Like them or not, sad to see NYC media giant [Gawker] forced to the brink,” Schneiderman, who announced in March that he and 15 Democratic AGs would explore taking legal action against “climate change dissenters,” said Friday on social media.

The reactions on social media from Hogan and Gawker Media founder Nick Denton were about what one would expect from the two opposed parties:

But not everyone in media agreed that Gawker had gotten a bum deal.

“Burn Gawker Burn I dance gleefully on your grave,” said the Hollywood Reporter’s Seth Abramovitch.

Gawker announced Friday it would sell its seven brands and other assets to the media company Ziff Davis, which owns IGN, PC Magazine, and Geek.com. The media group is also reportedly considering filing a lawsuit against Thiel, Forbes reported Friday.

“The lawyers are exploring whether this could be a case of tortious interference, racketeering or other potential claims,” a source said just hours after the website filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.