[FreedomToCreate]

To modify a quote from The Dark Knight:

"Let me get this straight, you think one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in the world, who owns the Washington Post and pays out of his own pocket to send rockets to space, won't stand up for himself so your plan is to blackmail this person?

Good Luck

[aerovistae]

Same thing I was thinking. That said, I hate the National Enquirer and I am praying this leads to their destruction.

On a tangentially related note I also believe there ought to be laws restricting paparazzi from harassing people. I think it's awful every time I see someone trying to walk down the street or out of a hospital or courthouse and swarmed by cameras that won't leave them alone even in moments of grief. They're people. I don't understand why it's considered perfectly acceptable to treat them that way just because they've become well-known.

Just a thought connected to my disdain for tabloids.

[Shivetya]

Well they have broken some amazing stories, they pretty much ended John Edwards career in the face of a lot of criticism. They broke their first in 2006 and followed up with the final is 2008.

so while tabloids can be annoying they sometimes are capable of breaking a story, usually only the sordid type, but those can be amazing

[aerovistae]

No, I don't support this argument. Pedophile priests probably gave support to many people and did a lot of good, too. They still need to be thrown forcefully from their offices and straight into prison.

We are not so desperate that we must accept evil just because it comes with a small payment of good. You can have the good on its own. That reporter or his team could just as easily have found that story while working for a different publisher.

[sytelus]

You are missing the point. Entities like National Enquirer are not like Gawker that was bankrupted by Thiel with his wealth might. These entities are funded by politics aka American GDP aka your tax dollars. As Bezos clearly outlined in this letter, Trump administration helped these people have very lucrative deals with Saudies to get their financing, very likely, US government doing some favors to Saudies in return. Even if Bezos managed to bankrupt them, they will immediately popup with new name pretty much next day, by same owners and would run in exact same way doing exact same things. You can't kill it.

[cr1t1calh1t]

National Enquirer is funded by US tax dollars?

I'm no friend of the National Enquirer, but we should make sure we're talking about facts here..

Do you have any proof for your assertion that they're "funded by politics aka American GDP aka your tax dollars"?

[aerovistae]

You might overestimate how much people care to pour into the National Enquirer. Or I might underestimate it, sure. Time will tell.

[nyolfen]

the justice department certainly can in fact kill it

[sytelus]

It takes less than an hour of paperwork to spin a new business entity that is exactly the same as old. Bankruptcy laws limits financial losses for owners. Entities like AMI are often set up in a way so such financial losses would be negligible, if any.

[nyolfen]

it's pretty difficult when you're in prison

[gesman]

Regulation is required.

Otherwise destroying 1 paparazzi or 1 tabloid will make another 5 pop up in their place.

[aerovistae]

Partially agreed. Journalism should always be unregulated, but justice should act faster and be more reliable when journalism strays to evil.

I wish there was any way for the commoners to make public policy proposals. Imagine like a reddit for discussion of policy, but where the most upvoted things actually got looked at by people in decision-making positions.

It's very frustrating to me that I sometimes see really deep, interesting analysis of issues (and actual back-and-forth exchanges!) on reddit and never any such thing from actual politicians. Look at this thread here~ [0] Honestly insightful and meaningful discourse that anyone can participate in. They took what sounded on the surface like a great idea and pointed out critical flaws, and suggested superior alternatives. The constructiveness of the thread astounds me.

I wish this type of thing actually connected to the government somehow, like in Ender's Game where Ender's siblings construct internet aliases and join policy conversations, slowly gaining influence and popularity through their rhetoric and insight.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/aicgpz/serious_a...

[killjoywashere]

I doubt Bezos is going to stop at a legal thumping. He has the resources to destroy every dollar Pecker ever saw, ever dollar any of his employees or friends ever saw. I have little doubt many people in Bezos's employ have already developed multiple branch and sequel plans to ensure their boss never even has to acknowledge Pecker's homelessness in a cold city in winter.

[kyleblarson]

It worked swimmingly for Gawker.

[Jaepa]

Gawker never tried to extort Thiel, they just published their story. Nor did they have a history on sealing or using these stories as leverage.

Pretty well summaries in the 1st third:

> “Of course I don’t want personal photos published, but I also won’t participate in their well-known practice of blackmail, political favors, political attacks and corruption,” Mr. Bezos wrote of A.M.I., explaining why he had decided to speak out. “I prefer to stand up, roll this log over and see what crawls out.”

[bko]

They also refused a court order to remove the video:

> Yesterday the Hon. Pamela A.M. Campbell, a circuit court judge in Pinellas County, Fla., issued an order compelling Gawker to remove from the internet a video of Hulk Hogan fucking his friend's ex-wife, as well as a 1,400-word narrative of the video written by former Gawker editor A.J. Daulerio and 466 user-submitted comments. Here is why we are refusing to comply.

https://gawker.com/a-judge-told-us-to-take-down-our-hulk-hog...

[CydeWeys]

That may have been what gained them their enemy, but what actually destroyed them was what they did to Hulk Hogan -- they did what the National Enquirer is currently only threatening to do.

[favorited]

Who did Gawker blackmail?

[krackers]

Not blackmail, but outed Thiel

[crazypyro]

And seemingly created an enemy so powerful he destroyed their entire business.

[nullc]

Gawker was extremely and unrepentantly unethical. They destroyed themselves.

[simula67]

Gawker destroyed themselves

[philipov]

That's the joke. Sarcasm doesn't work well on the Internet.

[EGreg]

How did he do it

[crazypyro]

If you are seriously interested, Peter Thiel funded Hulk Hogan's lawsuit surrounding his sex tape and the resulting judgement forced Gawker to declare bankruptcy and end up selling for basically nothing.

[CalChris]

Outing is like revealing a trade secret. Once the trade secret is publicly known it is no longer a trade secret. However that reveal was on Thiel.

[empath75]

They’re hosted on aws, too.

[rajacombinator]

Keep in mind the people on the other side of this, according to Bezos, are the Saudis. I’d bet on their luck over his.

[killjoywashere]

The Saud family won't spend a dime on this. What do you do with a dangerously incompetent employee? You fire them.