https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VegtxEp2rU
This is an editorial, obviously. It reflects the views of David Bixenspan only and should not be construed as reflecting the opinions of SEScoops.com.
Last night, The New York Observer’s editors posted an editorial about some of the recent developments in Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker Media. Specifically, it pertains to the judge’s ruling allowing Hogan to hire a forensic expert to search Gawker’s computers, portable devices, cloud storage, and so on for proof that they leaked Hogan’s racist comments to The National Enquirer. As I reported here last week, Gawker will be appealing that ruling and has compelling evidence to suggest that it’s incredibly premature to suggest they were behind the leak.
The New York Observer editorial gets some of the basic facts wrong. Like many wrestling fans, they think Hogan using the N-word in an old interview is what got him in trouble when it was actually an oddly personal racist tirade on one of the sex tapes that was shot without his knowledge in 2007. Having said that, the overall point of the article is dead-on: This is a big deal, and it has implications reaching far beyond pro wrestling and celebrity gossip. Hell, the whole case does.
Specific to this latest development, the Observer describes the most recent ruling as having “much of the news media in frenzy”  because of “the potential loss of reporter’s privilege.” It’s a basic First Amendment Protection, and Judge Pamela Campbell is just throwing it out…why, exactly? Because they just happened to have an interest in Hogan’s reputation being ruined even if there’s no evidence to suggest they were behind said ruining?
Throughout the case, the perception has been that Campbell has favored Hogan, sealing any court filings that could make him look bad (like an old magazine photo shoot of him with naked women). This is just the latest and most egregious thing she’s done. Yes, she did limit what can be searched for, but there’s still no actual evidence suggesting Gawker did this. Regardless of how you feel about Gawker or the lawsuit itself over them publishing clips of one of the Hogan sex tapes, this is just not something that should be happening.
Like I said, though: It’s not just this. The whole case is a big deal. As egregious as Gawker’s actions may come off and as strange as their defense (Hogan made graphic depictions of his sex life part of his public persona) may sound, most legal experts who have commented to the media thinks they have the case won. A Hogan-friendly local jury could go against them, but they’d inevitably win an appeal. It’s a fascinating battle over freedom of the press involving arguably the biggest pro wrestling star ever and all sorts of crazy things like sex tapes, FBI stings, and alleged cover-ups.
Jesse Ventura’s defamation lawsuit against Chris Kyle’s estate was a similarly big deal. On its face, it may not be any kind of precedent setting piece of litigation because it’s much more straightforward: Did Chris Kyle lie about Jesse Ventura making comments suggesting he deserved to lose friends in the Iraq war and that he then punched Ventura? A jury (the majority, as agreed to by both sides) agreed that yes, he lied. But it was almost unheard of for a public figure to win that kind of defamation case. The estate is appealing and various media companies are intervening on the claim of unjust enrichment (essentially making money from the lie), which Ventura has spoken out against in interviews. That fight could have huge, long-term legal implications, as well.
In all likelihood, the Hogan-Gawker trial will be even bigger, at least in terms of coverage. It’s so much more tabloidy and salacious, but the consequences of all of the actual legal issues have real world importance.This is bigger than pro wrestling and celebrity gossip.
I know I’ll be watching closely, and I hope you all will be, too.
