SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The fallout of the American Presidential election of 2016 continues, and many are concerned about what the eventual consequences will be. One potential member of a Trump administration has many more worried than not. Observe:
As Donald Trump commences his ghastly slouch toward Washington, a coterie of sycophants snatches at his coattails: Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie—we knew this particular trio would scurry after heightened relevance and authority. Unsurprisingly, all three have slavered their way to the president-elect's transition team, and possibly into the Cabinet. Less expected, perhaps, was billionaire PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel's recent appointment to the same advisory committee. And yet, an alliance between Trump and Thiel, however appalling, seems so fitting that hindsight renders it almost preordained.
One wonders about the temperament of the President-Elect, but even more about the basket of, um, unemployed, that swarm around him seeking positions in the new administration. Peter Thiel is well know for having bankrupted Gawker over the Hulk Hogan affair, but for personal reasons.
But Thiel did not bankroll Hogan's lawsuit in a show of fraternity. He had nurtured a grudge since December 2007, when Gawker published an article entitled, "Peter Thiel is totally gay, people." Thiel condemned Gawker for publicly outing him, though the site contended that he had already disclosed his sexuality to those in his social sphere. Although Thiel referred to Gawker as "a singularly terrible bully," he did not pursue legal action. Instead, his rancor smoldered until, nine years later, he landed a belated—but fatal—blow.
What might such vindictiveness accomplish with more than millions of dollars, but the full faith and credit of the United States, if it sought to silence criticism, whistle-blowing, truth-telling and journalism? Should Soylentils be worried?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @11:20PM
Gawker outed Thiel while he was on a business trip in Saudia Arabia, where people have been flogged or even stoned to death for homosexuality. Gawker endangered Thiel's life, and he retaliated by taking down Gawker. I have absolutely no problem with that.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jimshatt on Monday November 21 2016, @12:22AM
(Score: 1) by an Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @04:37PM
Sometimes it's better to kill the attack dog than its owner.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday November 22 2016, @02:37PM
Kill the owner, and there's no more attack dogs from that quarter.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by n1 on Monday November 21 2016, @01:45AM
Apparently to him a business deal is worth risking a death sentence.
He also didn't sue Gawker over them outing him, he instead waited a few years and funded Hulk Hogan because "single digit millionaires like Hulk Hogan can't afford access to the legal system" ... Out of all the people who are denied access to the legal system or proper defense lawyers, Hulk Hogan was the priority and the best way to draw attention to how money buys justice.
I am interested to see how he uses his new platform to shed light on the other injustices in the legal system and how the handful of us that arn't millionaires at all are also at a disadvantage when seeking legal redress.
Gawker was not a good publisher, the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Monday November 21 2016, @02:28AM
If what he wanted (as a secondary goal maybe) was an indictment of the system itself, then is actually a pretty goods way to do it. The system has got so biased that even famous and moderately wealthy people can't fully afford it.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday November 21 2016, @04:01AM
On what basis would he have sued? He is gay and so publishing that fact was completely legal in the US, the fact that he was in Saudi Arabia at the time wasn't something that Gawker could necessarily foresee and wouldn't likely be liable for even if he did file suit. Presumably, he did consult with attorneys at the time as that's a much more efficient way of going after somebody that wrongs you than financing a 3rd party to do it for you.
I think him being nominated is arguably a good thing. Trump has promised to stop allowing media consolidation and Thiel is somebody who knows all too well how damaging the corruption and incompetence in the MSM has gotten.
We're just going to have to see how this all shakes out before getting too riled up. The MSM is basically only used by old people anyways, anybody that's younger or not a moron gets their news from a variety of non-traditional outlets anyways.
(Score: 2) by tfried on Monday November 21 2016, @07:44AM
damaging [...] corruption and incompetence in the MSM
So are you trying to say Gawker was part of main stream media? Or is that short for "Media my Side Must hate"?
(*) BTW, I do agree that even millionaires retain the right to some privacy, but then I'm not into celebrity gossips in the first place.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @02:46AM
> Gawker outed Thiel while he was on a business trip in Saudia Arabia,
Sounds made up. First I've heard of it. Can't find confirmation in google.
What I find is mention that Thiel was afraid of losing saudi money in his hedge fund.
And that I totally believe. Because he screwed the pooch so badly with that hedge fund that it lost over 90% going from ~$8B at its 2008 peak, shortly after Gawker published the story [gawker.com] (december 19, 2007), to ~$700M in 2010.
And guess who covered all of that in depth?
Gawker. Multiple [gawker.com] times [gawker.com]
So I think its much more likely that a man who already did not try to conceal that he was gay, he just didn't flaunt it, decided to scapegoat gawker for his own business failures because denial. Hell, maybe the saudis did pull their money out because of gawker's story. But that's Thiel's problem for taking money from people like that. It isn't like he was broke and had no other way to put food on the table. He chose to do business with homophobes. Its not Gawker's job to protect his morally bankrupt business deals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @09:28AM
Thiel might be a bully, but there's no question that gawker is one as well. They've done this shit to less resourceful people too.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Monday November 21 2016, @06:44PM
I just did a google search by date and I can't find any mention of Theil's homosexuality prior to the gawker article. I hate trump and theil's politics but good on him for having revenge.
Gawker used to play favorites with who it would smear and then it would taunt it's victims. Not to mention it and shitrag huffpo constantly tag team people, gawker taking the low road and then huffpo presenting a facade of respectability. They practically got trump elected because the lazy hipsters at those shitholes couldn't a clown who gave them easy stories to write with an extra topping of virtue signaling. When you got a guy who gropes his daughter and makes fun of cripples in front of a crowd, on camera. Well a highschool freshman could manage to shit out 1000 words without writers block in a few hours.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 22 2016, @04:40AM
> I just did a google search by date and I can't find any mention of Theil's homosexuality prior to the gawker article.
You seem to be confused about the meaning of "flaunt."
Here's something to try, google marc andreessen for any mention of his heterosexuality.
Also, why don't you go actually read the gawker article in question. It is clear you haven't.