This happened once the tape became “old news.”. In further support of this opinion, Anderson pointed out a dramatic drop-off in viewer statistics. Anderson contends that $15.4 million is a more likely estimate of the value of increase in Gawker’s profits in that time period. $5 million was on the lower end of the estimate. Thus increasing their profits by at least $5 million more than they would have made without the publicity generated from posting the sex tape video. He stated that web traffic to Gawker’s media site rose exponentially. According to his calculations, the video had increased Gawker’s worth by $54 million. Hogan’s attorneys also called Jeff Anderson, an expert in the valuation of intellectual property, including websites, to testify to the value of the company before and after the video had been posted. Looking for an expert witness? Click here to find a vetted and screened expert in any discipline. However, they are becoming essential witnesses where legal causes of action occur online, like identity theft and invasion of privacy. Digital media, marketing and information architecture experts like Shunn are popular in contemporary litigation. This was not including the estimated 2.5 million views on Gawker’s website. On the fifth day of trial, Shunn testified that, based on the number of screenshots taken by viewers before the post was removed, the clips were watched at least 99,149 times on YouTube and 4,452,266 times on other sites. Shunn discussed website traffic and estimated the number of times the sex tape was viewed on various websites. He was an expert in digital marketing and information architecture. In support of Hogan’s claim that Gawker exploited his name and violated his privacy for commercial gain, Hogan’s attorney Shane Vogt called Shanti Shunn. The words ‘ethical’ and ‘legal’ are not synonyms.” More importantly, Society of Professional Journalists Chairman Andrew Seaman comments that “he SPJ Code of Ethics is not relevant to whether an act is or is not legal. However, Foley testified that the constitution only protects Gawker’s written commentary regarding the sex tape, not the video itself. Gawker insists the posting was protected by the First Amendment. Foley testified on direct examination that the release of the sex tape violated the code of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. Responses to Foley’s comments on direct appeared to do little to help Hogan’s case. Foley’s potentially damaging admissions about his career and background are but one example of why it is so important to properly vet expert witnesses to ensure they are right for that specific case, no matter how impressive the credentials. Sullivan asked, “When you were last in the newsroom, there was no Facebook, right? There was no YouTube, right?” Foley responded that these media sources did not exist when he was a journalist. He moved to expose the expert’s lack of knowledge regarding social media outlets to the jury. Sullivan repeatedly referred to Foley’s career as occurring “back in the day.”. Also that he hadn’t worked as a news reporter in 43 years. This was done by highlighting that Foley had not worked in a newsroom as a journalist in 24 years. However during an intense cross examination, Gawker’s attorney, Michael Sullivan, attacked Foley’s career and credentials. In an attempt to attack Gawker’s journalistic credibility as an online media source, Hogan’s legal team first called University of Florida journalism professor Mike Foley as an expert on the fourth day of trial. It undoubtedly played a major role in jury deliberations at the end of the trial. The testimony of several expert witnesses with various specializations was at the heart of the case. Daulerio, who posted the video in 2012, company founder Nick Denton, and Gawker’s parent company are all named defendants in the case. Hogan claimed the website exploited his name for commercial gain and the humiliation has caused him severe emotional distress. This is after the online media company posted a sex tape of him and Heather Cole, his best friend’s wife. This was in a lawsuit for “shameful and outrageous invasion of privacy”. Celebrity ex pro-wrestler Terry Bollea, better known as “Hulk Hogan,” was awarded $140 million from Gawker Media.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |