www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> Fusion > Felix Salmon > a dangerous blueprint for perverting p
nettime's_sitting_ducks_in_a_row on Thu, 26 May 2016 16:37:41 +0200 (CEST)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> Fusion > Felix Salmon > a dangerous blueprint for perverting philanthropy


<http://fusion.net/story/306927/peter-thiel-gawker-dangerous-blueprint/>

Peter Thiel just gave other billionaires a dangerous blueprint for perverting philanthropy

	SUPERVILLAINS
	5/25/16 10:30 PM
	By Felix Salmon

Funding Hulk Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker? That's not cool. Actively
going out to find potential plaintiffs who might have cases against
Gawker and then giving them the money to bring those cases? Even that's
not cool.

You know what's cool? Reinventing the concept of philanthropy so as to
include weapons-grade attacks on America's free press, and doing so from
the very heart of The New Establishment.[1]

	[1] http://www.vanityfair.com/news/photos/2015/09/new-establishment-list-2015

This is the big story, which a lot of people are missing about the news
that Peter Thiel secretly funded[2] a series of lawsuits against Gawker:
the Facebook board member and Silicon Valley demigod just gave the world
a master class in how a billionaire can achieve enormous ends with a
relatively modest investment. That's a lesson many of his friends are
eager to be taught -- not least his protégé, Mark Zuckerberg, who is
just beginning to try to reinvent philanthropy for the 21st Century.

	[2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2016/05/24/this-silicon-valley-billionaire-has-been-secretly-funding-hulk-hogans-lawsuits-against-gawker/#4272ea678057

Thiel's interview with the New York Times[3] about his legal campaign,
in which a $10 million investment on lawyers managed to bring an entire
media company to the brink of disaster, is the new required reading in
Silicon Valley, especially the bit where he says that it's "one of my
greater philanthropic things that I've done."

	[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/business/dealbook/peter-thiel-tech-billionaire-reveals-secret-war-with-gawker.html?_r=1

Thiel, like most Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, loves to think of himself
as a visionary.[4]  His first company, PayPal, started as an attempt to
create a whole new global currency; since then he has invested most of
his time and money into ambitious attempts to change the world. But it's
his investment in a campaign against Gawker, intended to inflict as much
damage as he can[5] on Gawker Media and its proprietor, Nick Denton,
which could prove to be his most effective – and his most harmful.

	[4] http://foundersfund.com/the-future/
	[5] http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-huge-huge-deal

Thiel's tactics in going after Gawker are very, very frightening for
anybody who believes in freedom of speech; they're also extremely
effective, in an evil-genius kind of way.

Historically, news publications have treated certain subjects very
carefully: if you're rich and known to be litigious, then there's a good
chance that news organizations will have lawyers do a careful review of
anything they write about you before they publish it. That's the main
way that they protect themselves from the destructive potential of
lawsuits being brought against them.

But Thiel has just upped the stakes. Back in 2006, he promised that he
would rain destruction on Denton and his associates if Gawker ever outed
him as being gay, which they did, the following year. But he didn't sue
Gawker over the articles that they wrote about him. Instead, he just
sat, and waited, and waited, for years, as Gawker published thousands
and thousands of articles about thousands and thousands of people, most
of whom were entirely unrelated to Thiel.

Gawker is a fast-moving site; it can't (and doesn't) carefully lawyer
every single thing it publishes. No one can. And so Thiel knew that, if
he just had patience, eventually he'd be able to seize his chance, and
make good on his threats. He hired a legal team, told them to look for
promising cases, and then started funding them with millions of dollars.

Thus did Thiel end up bankrolling the hugely expensive Hulk Hogan case
against Gawker, along with an unknown number of others. And thus did the
Hogan case become an attempt to bring a media organization to its knees,
more than it was an attempt to deliver justice for Hulk Hogan himself.

Hogan could have accepted a substantial financial settlement; he could
also have made it much more likely that he would get paid, by suing in
such a manner as to make Gawker's insurance company liable for any
verdict. Instead, he refused all settlements, and withdrew the insurable
complaints, to ensure that the company itself would incur as much damage
as possible.

The next step, after the Hogan verdict, was for Thiel to go public.
After the enormous damages were announced and the long appeals process
creaked into action, it started to become obvious that Gawker would need
to raise more capital in order to continue to be able to fight the case.
(In the worst case scenario, it would need to put up a $50 million
bond.[6]) Gawker had already sold some new stock[7] in January; there
was talk of doing the same thing again. With cash, Gawker could fight
the Hogan verdict, get it reduced or even thrown out entirely, and carry
on as a going concern.

	[6] http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/19/media/hulk-hogan-gawker/
	[7] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/business/media/gawker-media-sells-minority-stake-to-investment-company.html

But then the Thiel bombshell dropped. The Hogan case, it turned out,
wasn't a war in which Gawker could emerge victorious; instead, it was
merely a battle in a much larger fight against an opponent with
effectively unlimited resources.

Gawker could continue to fight the Hogan case; it could even win that
case outright, on appeal. But even if Hogan went away, Thiel would not.
Thiel's lawsuits would not end, and Thiel's pockets are deeper than
Denton's. Gawker's future is indeed grim: it can't afford to fight an
indefinite number of lawsuits, since fighting even frivolous suits is an
expensive game.

The result is that investing in Gawker right now is a very unattractive
proposition, since any investor knows that they will be fighting a
years-long battle with a single-minded billionaire who doesn't care
about how much money he spends on the fight. And if Gawker can't raise
any new money to continue to fight the Hogan case, then its corporate
end might be closer than anybody thinks. The company's money-spinning
sites like Gizmodo and Lifehacker will live on, somehow: they have value
to potential purchasers, and are assets which can be sold in
satisfaction of a financial judgment. But Gawker Media, the unique and
fearless media organization led by Nick Denton, is truly staring down an
existential threat, with no obvious way out.

It gets worse. If Thiel's strategy works against Gawker, it could be
used by any billionaire against any media organization. Sheldon Adelson,
Donald Trump, the list goes on and on. Up until now, they've mostly been
content suing news organizations as plaintiffs, over stories which name
them. But Thiel has shown them how to go thermonuclear: bankroll other
lawsuits, as many as it takes, and bankrupt the news organization that
way. Very few companies have the legal wherewithal to withstand such a
barrage.

Thiel, by funding Hulk Hogan, has managed to change the world. He has
made the lives of all news organizations much more precarious, and he
has created a whole new weapon which can be used by any evil billionaire
against any publisher. And the whole thing cost him merely $10 million
or so. Quite a return on invested capital!

Let's be clear: Thiel's $10 million (or however much it was) is not
philanthropic money. It's despicable for him to say that it is. But he
certainly has his friend Mark Zuckerberg's ear, and this is undoubtedly
a compelling example of how it is possible to leverage a vast fortune to
change the world,[8] even while spending relatively little of it.

	[8] http://fusion.net/story/241551/mark-zuckerberg-give-away-billions-philanthropy/

One can only hope that Zuckerberg's motivations, and those of his wife
Priscilla, are more noble than Thiel's. Because Zuckerberg has pledged
to spend almost all of his fortune on trying to change the world, and is
open to spending it in non-tax-deductible ways if those have a greater
effect. If Zuckerberg agrees with Thiel that this kind of activity is
noble and philanthropic, then the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative could wreak
enormous damage on the world.

Thiel sits on Facebook's board,[9] alongside Silicon Valley
mega-investor Marc Andreessen. If he remains there, after these latest
revelations, that's a clear sign that Zuckerberg places great stock in
how Thiel thinks and acts. And that is worrying not only in terms of
Facebook's future, but also for what the world can expect to see from
the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and other likeminded philanthropic
ventures.

	[9] http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2016/05/25/facebook-has-new-free-speech-problem-peter-thiel/

Silicon Valley has always had its fair share of large egos. But until
now, they haven't generally had the stated aim of using their personal
money to wage scorched-earth campaigns against private media
organizations. If Thiel succeeds in having such wars accepted as worthy
philanthropy, we should all be very afraid.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org
#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: