Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

Re:Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction by CPLX on Friday June 10, 2016 @01:46PM (#11878314)

People keep saying things like that. But I keep wondering if they have considered the flip side of that, which is are we really comfortable saying that the personal relationships of rich and famous people shouldn't be in the media?

When I go to the supermarket I see 500 headlines about famous people dating and breaking up and cheating on their partners, etc.

Sure it's a little lowbrow but do we really feel that rumors about Brad Pitt and Carrie Underwood's dating life are ok to publish but his aren't? Are Peter Thiel's relationships specifically somehow exempt from this aspect of the culture?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction by ohnomrbill on Friday June 10, 2016 @04:48PM (#11879896)

I don't feel that celebrity dating life is ok to publish, actually. It's very seedy and not in the public interest in the average case. Celebrites are fairly open about their disgust for the constant filming of their private life. I would relish it if Brad Pitt or someone else got a similar judgement from the courts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction by Paul-ish on Friday June 10, 2016 @05:35PM (#11880234)

> I don't feel that celebrity dating life is ok to publish, actually. It's very seedy and not in the public interest in the average case.

Freedom of the press and freedom of speech is not about evaluating everything said and determining if something is "in the public interest" in the United States. I think that focus on the "public interest" aligns more with European or Chinese cultural values.

If we are talking about personal values, I am glad we don't have censors in the US. Even if you and I can agree celebrity gossip probably has no value, what get defined as "not in the public interest" is too easy to be politically determined.

[ Parent | on HN ]