Free Speech

Let Me Tell You Something Brother, The Hulk Hogan Victory Is Going To Be Reversed On Appeal

Hulk Hogan victory might be temporary, but it is very real.

By  
on

Hulk HoganLate Friday evening, Hulk Hogan won his $100 million lawsuit against Gawker. It took a jury just six hours to find Gawker.com liable for invasion of privacy. The jury awarded Hogan (real name: Terry Bollea) $115 million in damages because Gawker published a sex tape of Hogan and another women, the wife of Tampa area D.J. Bubba the Love Sponge (a.k.a. Todd Clem).

The Hulkster cried.

Gawker founder Nick Denton has already released a statement about the company’s intention to appeal. He and then editor-in-chief, Albert J. Daulerio, were found personally liable as well:

Given key evidence and the most important witness were both improperly withheld from this jury, we all knew the appeals court will need to resolve the case. I want to thank our lawyers for their outstanding work and am confident that we would have prevailed at trial if we had been allowed to present the full case to the jury. That’s why we feel very positive about the appeal that we have already begun preparing, as we expect to win this case ultimately.

Full disclosure: Above the Law enjoys a business relationship with Gawker Media. Additional disclosure: I believe it’s critical to live in a world where news value is determined by publishers and not famous ex-wrestlers. Diaper disclosure: HOLY TYPEBALLS THIS IS BAD for anyone who writes about public figures. Did I miss the part where Donald Trump was already elected and “opened up” the libel laws?

But even without those caveats, it seems likely that Gawker will either prevail on appeal, or at least have the award significantly reduced. Hogan is a public figure, the existence of the tape was a matter of some discussion long before Gawker published it, and there were some questionable exclusionary decisions. Yada yada. Even if there was “harm,” $115 million of flying leg drop harm seems excessive.

Still, the immediate reality for any media professional has to be: hang onto your butts. Juries are taking the privacy of their beloved celebrities very seriously. The public, beset by a world where nothing feels private anymore, has little patience for paparazzi “journalism.”

Sponsored

At least, they don’t want to support that crap when they put on clothes and go to jury duty. When they’re surfing with one hand, Google analytics notes different preferences.

If I was me ten years ago, I’d tell me to throw out everything I know about free speech, regardless of what happens on appeal. The nutjobs with guns protect the Second Amendment, not the First. Standards of decency and standards of liability have been blurred. If someone sent me a video of Obama boning Vladimir Putin while two Grey aliens looked on, I’d be more afraid of the privacy implications than the intergalactic gestapo. I trust my news instincts, but I sure as hell wouldn’t trust a judge or jury to understand.

Now, if you’ll excuse me I’m going to go back to Tweeting obscenities at college kids who are busting my bracket. Most of them aren’t famous enough to try sue me for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , ,