![]() However, if they want to land the big interviews that bring in the huge numbers – and cash along with it – they need to be seen as a more legitimate agency.”įor both brands, the jury’s verdict is not the end. If they want to be the Weekly World News, gaining lots of readers but few who take them seriously, then this was exactly the right move. Sure, they got a lot of hits, but no one will mistake them for an actual news source anytime soon. Where he was once an all-American icon to tens of millions, his name has become a national punchline…and he has been tarred and feathered as a racist due to comments that were released in the wake of all the media associated with this case.Īs Kristen Sanne, a marketer observed, “Gawker, one of many tabloid news sites trying to be seen as real and respected journalism outlets took a major step backward regarding this situation. With that in mind, Hogan would be wise not to cash any checks or borrow against this windfall just yet.Īnd, regardless of who wins this case, both parties have difficult public relations issues to sort out. The judge in the first case was very favorable to Hogan’s side of things, reportedly making decisions to allow or block evidence that routinely favored Hogan’s counsel. Gawker has already said it would appeal, that could be bad for Hogan. The judge and jury sided with Gawker, awarding a massive punitive judgment against the website. Gawker fought back, saying they weren’t the source to originally break the news about the tape and that Hogan had, himself, gone on various news outlets to discuss the contents. Hogan’s attorneys said their client didn’t consent to the video and Gawker never tried to contact anyone in the video or ever in possession of the video. Gawker says it’s a journalism outfit publishing materials of significant public interest. Hogan says the posting of the video violated his privacy. The incident even incited a radio war in Hogan’s hometown of Tampa, FL … a battle that eventually included two major broadcast networks and two big name radio personalities.Īt the core of the case is an argument of how much privacy a celebrity is entitled to. Since that video was published, Hogan lost a lucrative contract with World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) over comments made in what he thought was a private encounter. The suit stems from an incident in which the site published an infamous sex tape featuring Hogan without his permission or consent. But they may be celebrating too early, while the legal system could be lurking just outside the ring to launch a sneak attack and send Hogan down for the count. The judgment, more than $110 MILLION dollars, raised eyebrows but had fans of Hogan “hulking out” for their hero. The jury is back, and it looks like Terry “Hulk Hogan” Bollea will receive a massive windfall in his lawsuit against tabloid website Gawker. Gawker has been forced to pay its legal fees for the case since at least mid-2015, after going over its insurance cap, according to The New York Times.By Roman Temkin, New York-based Entrepreneur Denton had mostly bootstrapped Gawker since its founding in 2002.īut the most pressing question for Gawker is exactly how much of the $115 million or more, if any, it will have to actually pay in the short term. Previously, Gawker had raised very little outside capital. ![]() In January, Gawker reportedly agreed to sell a minority stake in itself to Columbus Nova Technology Partners, partially to help with legal expenses (and also to fund growth into categories like ecommerce and video). the requisite factors for preliminary injunctive relief (see Bollea v. Gawker won a ruling quashing a series of trial court orders that had sealed hundreds of pages of. Gawker does, presumably, have some cash on hand. In October 2012, Terry Bollea, a/k/a Hulk Hogan, sued Gawker Media LLC (Gawker). A group of media companies who intervened in Hulk Hogan v. Of course, if Gawker loses the appeal, it could eventually end up paying all (or some) of the award. There is a Florida statute that caps the type of bond Gawker would have to put up while waiting for appeal at $50 million, and the court could also temporarily stay the judgment without having Gawker pay anything.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |