Granted, this strategy is very high risk unless you're one of the richest people in the world.
But what person without means is going to be the target of tabloid blackmailing?
No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
41–50 of 783 posts
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#42Granted, this strategy is very high risk unless you're one of the richest people in the world.
The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance you're reading this Jeff, good on you!
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#43I’m glad not all tech billionaires are sterile robots
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#44Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#45> Well, that got my attention. But not in the way they likely hoped. Any personal embarrassment AMI could cause me takes a back seat because there’s a much more important matter involved here. If in my position I can’t stand up to this kind of extortion, how many people can? Can’t remember the last time I’ve seen a prominent person post the details of a personal extortion attempt out of defiance for all to see.
Not specifically a big fan of Uncle Jeff but gotta admit it takes some guts to publish such a thing. Sneaky edit : I'm sure one could not ignore his massive balls on any of the selfies AMI allegedly got their hands on ;)
Yeah, and he makes a great point - if he can't fight back against this sort of thing, then who the heck ever could?
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#46I am glad that Jeff Bezos is aggressively going after AMI for their scummy behavior. I was also glad that Peter Thiel aggressively went after Gawker Media for their scummy behavior. Sometimes these badly behaving media outlets need to have a billionaire personally invested in stopping their bad behavior.
Gawker didn't try to extort Hulk Hogan or Peter Thiel. The situations aren't comparable.
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that this is a great example. The scandal was already out. His wife was already leaving him. The public already knows and already assumed lurid exploits. The rest is just details. It would be different if the decision to publicize this extortion attempt had been what caused his divorce.
They are threatening to post photos of him sexting. Calling that "just details" is a stunning lack of empathy. Even if you'd personally be unperturbed by a similar situation, the vast majority of humans would find it humiliating and invasive in the extreme.
> They are threatening to post photos of him sexting.
Is a photo published in a disreputable magazine significantly worse than the information already out so far which already got people thinking about him sexting anyway combined with losing custody of ~70 billion dollars in the coming divorce? I'm not so sure. Their privacy was already thoroughly invaded before this latest development.
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#48Now this is Fuck You Money.
Well in this case there's no money involved really.
It's just a fuck you.
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#49Apparently AMI and David Pecker's non-prosecution agreement for the Michael Cohen stuff is contingent on them not continuing to do crime. So i guess that's out the window now.
Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker
#50I am glad that Jeff Bezos is aggressively going after AMI for their scummy behavior. I was also glad that Peter Thiel aggressively went after Gawker Media for their scummy behavior. Sometimes these badly behaving media outlets need to have a billionaire personally invested in stopping their bad behavior.
Gawker didn't try to extort Hulk Hogan or Peter Thiel. The situations aren't comparable.
Yeah, that was more open and shut (court orders them to do something, they refused. Play stupid games win stupid prizes)