I copied the relevant bit from here (http://www.businessinsider.de/sundance-nobody-speak-gawker-h...):

> But two months after the verdict, it was revealed that Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel was responsible for financing Hogan's case against Gawker. It was also revealed that the major motivation for Thiel to do that was less because he was sympathetic to what Hogan was going through and more that he wanted Denton and Gawker to feel his wrath after the site ran a story in 2007 outing him as being gay.

IIRC, they tried to make a first amendment argument about ... releasing someones sex tape without their consent. Oh, and, of course, calling that "journalism."

If that's all you got out of it, you should watch it again. Or maybe just read this synopsis: http://www.businessinsider.de/sundance-nobody-speak-gawker-h...

Okay, sure. If I gave a more charitable spoiler, it might be: The documentary expresses that society requires an independent free press. That's their main point. Trying to make that point through the Gawker case is, IMHO, completely divorced from reality.