On Saturday, August 20, 2016, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Kevin M. <drunkbastar...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','drunkbastar...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >> >> >> 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. >> > > Says who? It isn't only good journalism that deserves protection. >
Says a jury. And we aren't talking about journalism. We are talking about a website that posted a home made porn as click-bait. > > Posting sex tapes and outing sexual orientation are not disqualifications > from the protections afforded journalists - and even are not really per se > irresponsible journalism. > > I agree, but journalists didn't post the video; it was posted to drive traffic to a website. > > I think half of what comes across Fox news is shabby stuff and does not > deserve the proud label of journalism - but I would defend them against > attempts to sue them in court. Irresponsible, obnoxious, bad and even > harmful journalism is the price we pay for a free society. > No it isn't. And unless FoxNews aired a sex tape of Macho Man Randy Savage snapping into more than a Slim Jim, there is no comparison. There are limits to free speech, as courts have ruled time and again. This time around a jury decided that a sex tape posted without permission had no journalistic merit. It wasn't bad journalism because it wasn't journalism. It was invasion of somebody's privacy and Gawker's only defense was that since the person is a public figure, they are not entitled to privacy. They hid behind the 1st Amendment the same way a guy who wants to own a garage full of rocket launchers hides behind the 2nd Amendment. It is a bullsh*t defense, and a jury saw through it. Bad journalism is protected by the 1st Amendment. Nonexistent journalism is not. -- 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 tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
