VidMate
Free YouTube video & music downloader
ACTOR
A.J. DaulerioHulk HoganCharles HarderDavid Folkenflik
DIRECTOR
Brian Knappenberger
SYNOPSICS
Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (2017) is a English movie. Brian Knappenberger has directed this movie. A.J. Daulerio,Hulk Hogan,Charles Harder,David Folkenflik are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2017. Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (2017) is considered one of the best Documentary movie in India and around the world.
The trial between Hulk Hogan and Gawker Media pitted privacy rights against freedom of the press, and raised important questions about how big money can silence media. This film is an examination of the perils and duties of the free press in an age of inequality.
Fans of Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (2017) also like
Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (2017) Reviews
Schoolyard Bully Finally Gets Smacked Down, Proceeds To Cry About It
This completely one-sided affair with copious amounts of willfully blind hypocrisy, irony and ignorance is good for nothing other than seeing, in living color, the cesspool that was GAWKER Media and its amazingly smug and self-righteous founders, "editors" and "journalists" (cough cough) finally get its comeuppance. From that standpoint, you will thoroughly enjoy the film. Hence my 2 star rating instead of 1. Particularly sad is the filmmaker's desperate attempt to juxtapose Trump with the root of this documentary, Bollea v GAWKER. They intersperse shots of Trump and his base calling out the media with shots of the court case as if they were somehow connected. Don't be fooled, the GAWKER case and Trump's tirades against the media never crossed paths in reality. One can only assume the filmmaker did this in a desperate attempt to gain notoriety for the film and sympathy for the subject matter which in GAWKER's case is a pretty tough, if not impossible sell. Next they argue that Peter Thiel's involvement was the only reason GAWKER lost the case and was subsequently bankrupted. Yes, how dare someone with pockets deep enough to actually take them on head to head showed up, otherwise they would have won. I guess now they know how it felt to all the "little people" they defamed on a daily basis with no means to fight back. This blatantly obvious irony and hypocrisy is absolutely lost on them. The filmmaker then goes on to highlight the "dangers" of "ultra- wealthy" individuals buying media outlets in order to control information and reporting. They use casino magnate and right-wing boogieman Sheldon Adelson purchasing the Las Vegas Review-Journal as their go-to example of this peril, yet amazingly fail to mention Jeff Bezos, Amazon founder and the world's second richest man, purchasing the far more influential Washington Post whose usage of anonymous sources in their reporting is just an accepted norm at this point. All the while, a Washington Post journalist is one of the interviewees espousing the dangers of the Adelson purchase. Once again, the irony is overwhelming. Also, what the journalists interviewed and another reviewer on here fail to understand, but thankfully the jury did, is that Hulk Hogan and Terry Bollea ARE two different people in the sense described by the GAWKER case. Professional Wrestling is not like acting or being a sports figure or personality of any kind. An "old-school" wrestler such as Hogan/Bollea is expected to maintain his in-ring persona/character as a completely separate identity from his true self even when just strolling around outside their homes. It's called maintaining "kayfabe" (google it). So when "Hulk Hogan" is being interviewed or speaking about himself, that is absolutely completely different than interviewing "Terry Bollea". They ARE two different, distinct people. One is a character, one is the person playing the character, but one does not necessarily have the same characteristics of the other. I understand this is a difficult concept to understand, but, it's just a known fact in the wrestling industry... something of which an actual journalist should have complete knowledge. Lastly, and I apologize for this review being so long, it's just that this documentary is so easy to pick apart, but, the moral the filmmaker is trying to get across, particularly in the GAWKER case, is, if you're a "public figure" a media company should be allowed to publish nude photos or a sex tape of you, secretly shot and distributed without your consent, otherwise it is somehow an affront to "free press". Does that make sense to you? I seem to remember sports personality Erin Andrews being secretly filmed through a peephole in her hotel room, suing and winning millions of dollars and the media applauded her, and rightfully so. But, I guess if it's the media profiting off the photos/video and not some ordinary creeper, it's a completely different story. Are you beginning to get the same sense of the hypocrisy and irony I did? I think just maybe you are...
A mess
This documentary can be summed up as defending professional slanderers and patting themselves on the back for the role of the media. You can't talk about the important role of media in democracy, cue sappy music, and then talk about what Gawker does/did. They go on to defame everyone on the opposite side. The rest is anti-trump bullshit and hyperbole. It is a disgusting self-righteous turd. More Eat the rich crap. Crying because they seemed to want to destroy Gawker as a business. UH, hello? Gawker existed to destroy others.
not a documentation but Nick Denton's slandering
How can one possibly call this a documentary? Entirely one sided story funded by Nick Denton to get back at Peter Thiel. Apparently Nick did not learn the lesson and have absolutely no regret for people he hurt for a profit. Nick Denton is a big bully with hundreds of millions and used bankruptcy to avoid paying damages. Yet the film portrayed him as an innocent victim. How disgraceful! To sum it up, a Gawker quality video that probably isn't worth any of your time.
Possible spoilers. Free press don't do irony.
I was hoping for so much more from this and hugely disappointed. By the closing scenes when the rousing music was swelling and we should all be standing on our chairs shouting for the small man, I cut the end completely. It became clear half way through where this was going. Until journalism addresses its own internal issues of mass manipulation, and using its highly lucrative platform for political grandstanding, they will only have themselves to blame. Distrust comes from playing politics, then hiding behind a right to a 1st Amendment to do so. Its all very student union with no personal responsibility and utterly disregards the less than honourable actions of many so called journalists. Todays MSM is built on 'coulds', 'mays', and random opinion. Accuracy and integrity were sacrificed on the altar of corporate financing decades ago, and to now complain about it is too little too late.
Not worth watching.
I'll keep mine short. This is nothing more than one sided drivel. I actually find it amazing to watch how people like Gawker can feel so much self pity for themselves and actually spin stuff the way they see it. Don't worry the hypocrisy and drivel doesn't end there. Then they go even further with some rich gay dude, some old rich dude, and some old rich orange that became president. All of it is one sided and you could easily find their counterpart on the other side of the isle. These companies, news outlets, people of power all do the same things no matter which side they are on and Gawker seemed like the kings of "ME! ME! ME!" media. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** To add to the hypocrisy is the people who liked this in their comments. While they talk about "Free Speech" a lot I'm sure they would be throwing a fit if someone took a privately recorded video of them having intercourse and then turned it for a profit online.