[LA_Banker]

There's a certain, perverse form of cognitive dissonance in thinking what Gawker did to Hogan was wrong, but ViolentAcrez and his posting of creepshots of underage girls was somehow unimpeachable free speech – and therefore his freedom to continue doing such ought to be protected.

Do not the girls and women whose privacy he was invading not deserve the same right to privacy?

[jedberg]

I never said what VA was doing was right or wrong, not did I say what they did to Hogan was right or wrong.

I just said I don't feel bad because they were unethical in their journalism and caused real harm to people because of it (real people besides VA).