First Amendment Rights v Responsibility: Bollea v Gawker

 I watched a show on Netflix last night on how the lawsuit Bollea v Gawker was an attack on the First Amendment. I actually got through most of it before I had to shut it off. I know that Netflix is a far-left mouthpiece just like every other form of entertainment franchise but I didn't realize that it was as bad as it is.

If you don't know the court case of Bollea v Gawker, it was about a scandal rag posting a Hulk Hogan sex tape and Terry Bollea (aka Hulk Hogan) said that it damaged his personal, and professional, life. It did, actually, because the WWE canceled his contract thus ending his long career as Hulk Hogan, mega-star of wrestling.

What Gawker said is that it was journalism and Bollea/Hogan going after them was just trying to silence the truth in reporting news. It didn't matter that it was a bloody sex tape that had nothing to do with anything but them trying to destroy his career under the guise of reporting the truth.

In the end, our hero, Hulk Hogan, won his case and a whopping 140 million dollars in damages. It also bankrupted Gawker, its owner, and several of its high-up employees and reporters.

Why am I on the side of Terry Bollea on this instead of the side of the media? After all, the First Amendment states quite clearly that we have the freedom of the press and free speech. Gawker was just exercising their rights to print what they felt needed to be printed. I am a proponent of keeping the Constitution intact no matter what.

The problem with this court case is this: where do you draw the line between free press and the right to privacy? What is the criteria for 'news' that is acceptable and not? What is actual 'journalism' and what is just rag-talk and gossip? Gawker posted a lot of controversial articles that humiliated a lot of high-powered people. Even the National Enquirer doesn't go as far as this online rag did.

Do people want to read about celebrities, athletes, billionaires, etc. short-comings and humiliating actions? Of course, they do. Gossip is exiting! Gossip is hearing how someone bigger than life is actually human. Gossip can bring those untouchables into reach. If you don't believe me, just think about how many people followed the Johnny Depp/Amber Hurd trials.

I, myself, don't care about such trivialities. Such things as the Depp/Hurt trial, who had sex with whom stories, who said what about whom, even whether some celebrity used a racial/ethnic slur don't mean anything to me or my daily life. It's all gossip and not worth my time.

The fact that people actually refer to this as journalism is what concerns me. To me, journalism is where a reporter goes out and writes about something newsworthy. For years journalism has become a joke. This Netflix documentary showed just how far left they have gone by interviewing several so-called reporters, editors, attorneys, etc. that all parroted the same thing: The First Amendment is under fire be the right and powerful conservatives are using the courts to destroy anyone that reports against them and their right to a free press.

There were a lot of references to Trump calling out the fake news. Of course, he did. What did the so-called journalists and news sources do for over four years? Reported nothing but lies about him, his family, and his administration. What have journalists and the news sources said about QuidProChinaJoe? Nothing but lies about how great he is. They covered up the Hunter Biden laptop before the election. They have done all they can to silence conservatives and conservative reporting.

Who, then, is trying to destroy the First Amendment and the rights to free speech and press? Hypocrisy was once something to be feared in politics. Now it's a badge of honor to say one thing and do the opposite.

I stand by the Constitution, as written and intended. I will never waver from that. You can say, or write, whatever you want. What I am against is a 'news outlet' that reports lies, gossip, propaganda, etc. and calling it journalism, the news, and worse, the truth. CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, WaPo, etc. have all claimed their propaganda, lies, and gossip where truthful reporting of the news. Journalists from these rags have claimed their reporting was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. As it turns out, it wasn't but they won't admit that.

This is all nothing that you haven't already figured out for yourselves. It is obvious what Hollywood, professional sports, mainstream media, social media, and even the government will only tell you what they want you to hear and that, my friends, is nothing but far-left propaganda and anti-American rhetoric to change this country into a socialist state with only one party in control.

It isn't rocket science and it doesn't take a Stephen Hawking or Albert Einstein to see what is going on. When you have charismatic politicians like William Jefferson Clinton or Barack Hussein Obama casting their spell over the people, it doesn't take long for the majority to become enchanted with those empty words. “Just words, just speeches,” as Barry said over and over during his campaign.

So, is journalism free from scrutiny over what is reported? If the mainstream media states something as news, as truth, does it have to make sure that it is actually true? Trump called them out and they didn't like it. What did they do? They lied and reported gossip and rumor as truth, as news. This is not journalism and it sure as hell doesn't fall under the protection of the First Amendment. Yes, every last citizen, no matter what their profession, has the right to free speech and the press. You don't have to be a 'journalist' to fall under these protections. Bloggers, such as myself, and anyone that writes anything that is made public fall under the right to a free press. BUT, if you are a blogger like me, you make sure that you don't say that your 'reporting' truth as news.

My blog states on the homepage that what I write is opinion. I don't claim that what I write here is news or even truth. Do I research? Yes, I do. Is due diligence involved when what I write I claim as truth? Of course. Am I a journalist? Oh, hell, no! I am a writer of blogs and books. I am a truck driver by trade. I am as truthful as I can be when I am writing anything about the 'news.' I do research to make sure that what I say is a close to the truth as possible. If not, I clearly state that it is my opinion.

I believe that if a person identifies as a journalist, it is their responsibility to ensure the accuracy of what they report. If not, then state, clearly and concisely, that it is their opinion of what the news is. Freedom of the press is like freedom of speech. Yes, we all have the right to say what we want, when we want, where we want. That is unless it is seditious, can harm another, invades personal privacy, or is in a place that is inappropriate. Oh, and we cannot say anything close to harming a sitting President, Vice President, or Congressman. Unless you are a far-left radical and threatening a conservative. That's okay as proven when Kathy Gifford posted that picture of her holding the head of Donald Trump, when Madonna stated that she wanted to bomb the White House, or when Johnny Depp asked, rhetorically, when the last time was that an actor shot a President.

Our freedoms. Guaranteed, not granted, by the Constitution of the United States of American are a fragile thing. They are also a two-edged sword. As has been said by many people over the years, “With great power comes great responsibility.” The press has great power. Now, I believe, it's time they showed us they also have great responsibility to state truth instead of rumor and gossip. Bollea v Gawker was a case where, even though it could be said otherwise, our freedoms were protected. The media doesn't have a right to invade our privacy, no matter who we are. They don't have a right to destroy a person just because that person said, or did, something humiliating or off-color. We are all human and we all make mistakes.

Paula Deen said the n-word years ago and her career is destroyed. Hulk Hogan says the n-word, in private, and his career is ended. It isn't like Hunter Biden who made home movies of him doing crack and having intimate relations with minors then giving that computer to someone else to work on and inspect.

Our freedoms are our lives. This is the ONLY country in the world that has our God-given rights guaranteed by law. With great power comes great responsibility. Our freedoms are our power. With that, we have great responsibility to uphold those rights and to ensure that those rights are used responsibly. Especially when those rights are being used to enlighten the country on things like Watergate, WhiteWater, the Clinton emails, war overseas, riots here at home, etc.

I, for one, cannot fathom how people can so glibly endorse political rhetoric and call it truth; how lies become truth because they are repeated over and over; how anyone could want our rights taken away from us, any of us.