Bollea v. Gawker Case

Bollea v Gawker is a 2013 case that revolved around the invasion of privacy. Terry
Bollea sued Gawker Media for invasion of privacy after the company published a sex tape of him
and Heather Clem. Terry sought to be paid 100 million dollars in damages. A verdict was
rendered in 2016, with the jury awarding Bollea 115 million dollars in compensatory damages
and 25 million dollars in punitive damages (Global Freedom of Expression, 2015).
The case highlighted the thin line that separates the freedom of the press and the invasion
of privacy. Gawker Media made various arguments founded on the freedom of speech and the
freedom of the press. Gawker Media advanced the argument that the tape was protected under
the First Amendment. The argument was that the contents of the tape constituted newsworthy
public concern (Somaiya, 2016). Further, the lawyers argued that the plaintiff had often
discussed his sexual activities in public, therefore rendering his claim of invasion of privacy
baseless. Since the plaintiff’s sexual life was in the public domain, it was not private.
According to the company, awarding the plaintiff the damages sought would have an
overreaching effect on the media in similar celebrity scandal cases. On his part, Bollea argued
that Gawker Media had maliciously published the sex tape. The publication caused harm and
amounted to a gross invasion of privacy (Somaiya, 2016). Bollea’s lawyers dismissed the
argument that the video was newsworthy and instead indicated that the publication caused their
client emotional stress and harm. According to the plaintiff, Gawker Media had only posted the
video for financial gain (Madigan, 2016). Bollea claimed that he was unaware that he was being
recorded and insisted that the act occurred as a result of his failing marriage (Eckholm, 2016).
Bollea told the court that he was depressed at the time, and this had led him to engage in the
extramarital affair. On the claim of reference to sexuality, Mr. Bollea’s lawyers argued that the

3
character of Hulk Hogan had made the claims and not Mr. Bollea. While Mr. Hogan does not
have a lot of privacy in matters of sexuality, Mr. Bollea had the right to keep his sexuality out of
the public domain. The lawyers argued that failing to punish Gawker Media would put the
privacy of many Americans at risk.
The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, press, and assembly. However,
while the United States Constitution does not explicitly guarantee citizens the right to privacy,
various cases have affirmed that those citizens have a right to privacy. Courts have indicated that
the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth amendments to the Constitution of the United States
have an implied right to privacy. In Lawrence v.Texas, the courts indicated that persons of the
same sex who engage in sexual conduct are entitled to privacy. These individuals are entitled to
live private lives (Cornell Law School, 2022). Defamation provides a balance between the right
to free speech and an individual’s right to privacy. Defamation is defined as a statement that
causes injury to another person’s reputation (Cornell Law School, 2022). Defamation is a tort and
includes both written statements, also known as libel, and spoken statements, also known as
slander. The freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment are not absolute. The case shows
the actions that one can take as well as the remedies available in case of a breach of privacy.

4

References

Cornell Law School. (2022). Privacy. LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 17 February
2022, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/privacy.
Eckholm, E. (2016). Hulk Hogan’s Suit Over Sex Tape May Test Limits of Online Press Freedom
(Published 2016). Nytimes.com. Retrieved 17 February 2022, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/us/hulk-hogan-vs-gawker-suit-over-sex-tape.html.
Global Freedom of Expression. (2015). Hogan v. Gawker – Global Freedom of Expression.
Global Freedom of Expression. Retrieved 14 February 2022, from
https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/hogan-v-
gawker/#:~:text=Gawker%20argued%20that%20the%20tape,activities%20in%20a%20publi
c%20forum.
Madigan, N. (2016). Hulk Hogan Takes Stand in His Sex-Tape Lawsuit Against Gawker
(Published 2016). Nytimes.com. Retrieved 17 February 2022, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/business/media/hulk-hogan-sex-tape-gawker-
lawsuit.html.
Somaiya, R. (2016). Hulk Hogan v. Gawker: A Guide to the Trial for the Perplexed (Published
2016). Nytimes.com. Retrieved 14 February 2022, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/business/media/hulk-hogan-v-gawker-a-guide-to-the-
trial-for-the-perplexed.html.