Thiel, and the few people he paid indirectly to actually push this hidden agenda of his to legally end Gawker, ended up using whatever paper they could find to kill Gawker by a thousand paper cuts – from funding Gamergaters and contrarian media outlets to figuring out through expensive mock trials what kind of jury members would most hate Gawker. So what the book describes, mostly, is the surprisingly complex how of the conspiracy. In the right corner: Peter Thiel, a relatively unknown libertarian tech billionaire back when Gawker outed him, was not just enraged by this personal hurt, did not only think Gawker represented a threat to society and privacy, but was also one of the few people rich enough that throwing millions around for a good cause represented chump change. All that matters is clicks and any shred of decency, especially towards people with any kind of power, must die. In the left corner: Gawker, representing an absolutely reactionary and unflinchingly nihilist view of journalism. All of which could’ve collapsed a long, complex and actually pretty darn intriguing conspiracy that pitted a seemingly unmovable object (Gawker) against an unstoppable force (Thiel’s money). he could.īut what becomes clear after a while is that the simple story I knew depended on an array of people, places and stupid decisions. And, truth be told, it could’ve been significantly shorter if Ryan Holiday didn’t try to throw Memorable Quotes™ in every. So on the surface, Conspiracy looks like a book that really doesn’t need 300+ pages. The story that I knew was that Thiel conspired against Nick Denton by funding the Hulk Hogan lawsuit in secret, which finally brought down the wretched hive of scum and villainy that was Gawker Media. And since I both devoured his latest book, and had some lingering thoughts, I thought the least I could do was steal kleinbl00’s title scheme and discuss them with y’all. But now that I’ve adapted Ryan Holiday’s notekeeping system into something that works for me, I actually have those thoughts written in my notes. Usually, such bookreading side-effects simply dissipate over time.
(I’ve since departed from that idea after the 10% reflective parts of the book pointed out that Trump’s office, while causing lots of outrage along the way, is too incompetent to really change history that much.)Īlso once in a blue moon, I finish a book and am left with some ideas or views that I keep thinking about in the subsequent weeks. Fire and Fury had this whole ‘history in the making’ feeling about it. It’s not necessarily because it’s objectively good – Fire and Fury comes to mind, which is 90% a soap opera – but it is always because it fundamentally intrigues me in some way.
Once in a blue moon, I have a book that I just completely devour in a few days.
0 kommentar(er)
