Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Media

Peter Thiel Could End Up Owning Gawker (pagesix.com) 68

An anonymous reader writes: Gawker's assets are now up for sale, and Page Six reports that they could be sold to a Hollywood movie studio which is "seriously interested" in adapting the site's stories into movies or TV shows -- and is also looking into filming the story of Gawker itself. Another interested buyer is described as a "group of hard-core Gawker fans" who are currently performing their own due diligence. But the bankruptcy manager for Gawker "has not ruled out the possibility" of selling the site to Peter Thiel. Also up for sale are "potential legal claims" Gawker may have against Peter Thiel, according to the Wall Street Journal.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Peter Thiel Could End Up Owning Gawker

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Not that gawker didn't have its flaws but wow this guy is everything wrong with the world

  • Imagine (Score:5, Interesting)

    by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <<ten.tsacmoc> <ta> <yburxyno>> on Saturday November 04, 2017 @04:44PM (#55490139)

    Just imagine what Gawker can do with ethics and credibility. Gawker exhibited the worst of ethics free reporting and had the audacity to call it journalism. The potential of what Gawker could be under the right management is incredible.

    • Re:Imagine (Score:4, Insightful)

      by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <phrosty@gmail.com> on Saturday November 04, 2017 @05:13PM (#55490213) Homepage

      Gawker exhibited the worst of ethics free reporting and had the audacity to call it journalism.

      I would have agreed with you a few years ago, but the unabashedly biased reporting being done today makes Gawker seem tame in comparison.

      • Re:Imagine (Score:4, Interesting)

        by HalAtWork ( 926717 ) on Saturday November 04, 2017 @07:45PM (#55490689)

        Not to mention myopic. Article authors don't look beyond their own nose for opinions or anecdotes. Everyone there is living in a bubble. It's in effect a self centered blog that attracts like and rejects anything incongruous.

        Completely useless at best, but most likely harmful overall.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by PopeRatzo ( 965947 )

      Gawker exhibited the worst of ethics free reporting

      You've never seen Breitbart, have you?

    • Gawker exhibited the worst of ethics free reporting and had the audacity to call it journalism.

      Call me evil, but I don't think outing billionaires or celebrity affairs is anywhere near the "worst" reporting.

      • Gawker exhibited the worst of ethics free reporting and had the audacity to call it journalism.

        Call me evil, but I don't think outing billionaires or celebrity affairs is anywhere near the "worst" reporting.

        How about ignoring a direct court order?

        Or calling for action against a specific race group?

        When you're calling for actual fucking action against a group of people based on the skin colour, you're nowhere near "not-evil".

        Gawker media on men and women:

        https://imgur.com/gallery/CQ5qgvu

    • by Anonymous Coward

      i can imagine what they could do

      unfortunately the headline suggests that they'll be owned by a corporate raider and snake oil speculator who spent a lot of money to make a 3rd party lawsuit with little merit into a much larger test case that may now serve as a precedent for other carrier oriented libel lawsuits

      isn't it funny how the core tenet of some peoples' 'libertarianism' is just 'i have the ability to do this (at other peoples' expense), so i should be able to'.

    • That IS journalism. Did you see how many professional, credible journalists stood up for Gawker and said the lawsuit against them was a chilling effect on freedom of the press?
  • Yeah, right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by goose-incarnated ( 1145029 ) on Saturday November 04, 2017 @04:52PM (#55490159) Journal

    Also up for sale are "potential legal claims" Gawker may have against Peter Thiel,

    They've got nothing, and they know it. The difference between "potential legal claims" and "legal claims" is that the former is just a euphemism for "fiction".

    • You can sell "potential legal claims" now? How does that work?

      Find someone with money, make a legal claim against them through a lawyer and then hope they settle? WTF?
      • You can sell "potential legal claims" now? How does that work?

        The patent troll business model is essentially the purchasing of potential legal claims.

"I will make no bargains with terrorist hardware." -- Peter da Silva

Working...