Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by intopieces 3597 days ago
The main objection I've seen (not speaking for the GP comment here, just in general) is the precedent that courts are now allowed to determine newsworthiness.

That is, with enough money backing your cause, you can get information that people previously deemed newsworthy suppressed.

I have no love for Gawker, but I'm on the fence about this assertion.
2 comments
juandazapata 3597 days ago
A private sex tape shouldn't be newsworthy. Same with sexual orientation of anybody. They were gossip trash privacy invaders. Acted like bullies and got what they deserved.
link
intopieces 3597 days ago
>A private sex tape shouldn't be newsworthy

What is often shouldn't be.

But that's precisely the question. Who gets to determine what is newsworthy and what isn't?

Can the government decide that independent footage of American soldiers committing crimes abroad is "not newsworthy" and suppress it, sue the organization, demand that it be pulled from the Internet?

Why or why not?

link
juandazapata 3597 days ago
A jury composed by citizens decided that.

I don't know you and I share a private sex tape of yours with my huge audience. We all agree that I should end up in jail, but somehow is "not that bad" because it was a company the one who did it? That's not a good example for the kids. Bullies should be punished wether they are a person or a company.

Videos of soldiers committing crimes are proof of a felony. A video of Hulk Hogan having sex or Thiel being gay is private life. Soldiers are funded by our taxes. Apples and Oranges.

link
yongjik 3597 days ago
Consider the alternative. Can the government decide that the videotape of a prominent opposition leader (or a leader of a social movement) having sex with his mistress is "newsworthy" material and surreptitiously deliver it to reporters?

Why or why not?

We can't abolish laws solely based on objection that the government can hypothetically abuse it. The government can easily abuse the absence of law, after all.

link
TrevorJ 3596 days ago
They could have reported on the sex act in question, what got them in trouble was that they showed video footage of it. That's very different than simply reporting it as news.
link