funkdoc Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well I think it's pretty insane to compare Hogan to a noted Klan member or Strom Thurmond considering we're talking about public racist actions against something that no one would ever even know about if there weren't terrible websites like Gawker out there invading people's privacy. ok, then donald sterling since that's a much more similar set of circumstances. people were mad at his private conversations getting blown up too...but there was plenty of history to back that up. hogan has that in general scuzziness if not racism specifically, which is enough in the eyes of many Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 I think stuff like Hogan exaggerating his story of slamming Andre isn't really all that comparable to owning apartments and trying to keep out black people and latinos. But the court of public opinion has spoken so what do I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 What about nearly a decade of being presented as a kids' hero while on steroids and lying about it when asked in a mainstream outlet, all while marketing vitamins to kids? What about the Graziano stuff? I believe he was caught saying some ugly things about John and his family when he thought no one was listening that time too. (You'd think he would learn his lesson.) What about being the only person in WWE who didn't send a card to Warrior's family, according to his wife, all while playing up how broken up he was about the whole thing when cameras were around? The general scumminess mentioned has nothing to do with not putting over young guys in late 90s WCW or telling lies about his career or whatever other thing *wrestling* fans want to throw at him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Yeah if the only bad things about him before now were just of the "exaggerating, carny ex wrestler" variety that would be one thing, but he's built a solid rep of being a scummy human being and the racist stuff is just the cherry on top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Bix, you said today on the Observer podcast something to the effect that Gawker should win the case but that since it is in Florida and Gawker's negative image could hurt it with the jury. Why should Gawker win the case? Why are they allowed to post a sex tape if at least one of the participants was not aware there was a camera? What precedent from the people you have talked to would allow this to happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexoblivion Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 http://fortune.com/2015/06/13/hogan-sex-tape-gawker-jury/ I don't know what Bix said, but this article suggests that sentiment as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alucard Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 I think they've pulled Rock 'n' Wrestling from the Network. And Hogan's pulled from WWE 2k16 which blows, for a game hyped as including everyone for the biggest roster ever in a WWE game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheapshot Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 The coverage worldwide for this story proves that Hogan still is the face of US Wrestling to a huge degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 http://fortune.com/2015/06/13/hogan-sex-tape-gawker-jury/ I don't know what Bix said, but this article suggests that sentiment as well. I read the article twice but I still don't see why it would win. Showing the videotape to me is a lot different than reporting that a tape was made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 But the Austin thing was really pre-social media. I have a feeling that, had the Austin arrest happened today, you would get a reaction far closer to what we are seeing here. This story is piggybacking the current celebrity trial du jour, but regardless, stories like this get way more traction than they did 10 years ago. similar thing to Mike Tyson. who has had a pretty remarkable evolution in how he's perceived from the 90s to now. Hogan's options probably involve either: (a) traveling evangelist carny, ( b ) some sort of reality show rehab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexoblivion Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Yeah I don't know. The NY Times article that was linked in the fortune post wrote that Gawker was arguing that because Hogan had made his sexual proclivities a matter of public interest, that it was newsworthy, and not an invasion of privacy. Some of it also seems to come down to the idea that a jury should not be able to decide what is newsworthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKWildcat Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Can you watch/listen to anything Steve Austin (domestic abuse/Wwe 2K poster boy/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything with Booker T (felon having committed armed robbery/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything Jimmy Snuka ("allegedly" killed his girlfriend/WWE HOF) Can you watch anything with Mike Tyson (convicted rapist/WWE HOF) If you answered yes to any, you should be ok watching Hogan because what they did is 100 times worse than anything Hogan said (again, said, in a personal conversation, no harm against any other human) And it pains, no PAINS me to even type this because I don't even like freaking Hogan whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Yeah I don't know. The NY Times article that was linked in the fortune post wrote that Gawker was arguing that because Hogan had made his sexual proclivities a matter of public interest, that it was newsworthy, and not an invasion of privacy. Some of it also seems to come down to the idea that a jury should not be able to decide what is newsworthy. There are a lot of editors & producers who get paid to do that and are getting it way wrong. I'm not sure that a jury could do any worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillThompson Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Can you watch/listen to anything Steve Austin (domestic abuse/Wwe 2K poster boy/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything with Booker T (felon having committed armed robbery/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything Jimmy Snuka ("allegedly" killed his girlfriend/WWE HOF) Can you watch anything with Mike Tyson (convicted rapist/WWE HOF) If you answered yes to any, you should be ok watching Hogan because what they did is 100 times worse than anything Hogan said (again, said, in a personal conversation, no harm against any other human) And it pains, no PAINS me to even type this because I don't even like freaking Hogan whatsoever. I can, and will watch all of them, I am usually able to separate the art from the artist's personal life. That being said I place a lot of stock in remorse and rehabilitation. You show that and I'm way more likely to not take any issue with you in any capacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Can you watch/listen to anything Steve Austin (domestic abuse/Wwe 2K poster boy/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything with Booker T (felon having committed armed robbery/WWE HOF)? Can you watch anything Jimmy Snuka ("allegedly" killed his girlfriend/WWE HOF) Can you watch anything with Mike Tyson (convicted rapist/WWE HOF) If you answered yes to any, you should be ok watching Hogan because what they did is 100 times worse than anything Hogan said (again, said, in a personal conversation, no harm against any other human) And it pains, no PAINS me to even type this because I don't even like freaking Hogan whatsoever. Everyone has their own lines as far as acceptability, etc. because of their own experiences and circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomethingSavage Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Exactly. I personally have thicker skin and higher tolerance when it comes to ignorance, prejudice, etc. But hey. I was born & raised in the south. Easily offended people either 1) don't survive or 2) don't stick around. Of course I could understand why a lot of people would be upset or disappointed by this stuff coming out. I just find it a little over the top when people act all outraged and legitimately angry over it. Don't people have personal lives to tend to? Why does everyone feel the need to constantly "be heard" and become activists all of a sudden?At least Hogan has the good sense to say disgusting comments and spout his personal opinions in private - even if it later becomes public. I wish more people on social media would take note. I've seen enough about flags, gay marriage, and this sort of stuff to last me a lifetime in the last two weeks alone. It's all just noise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenjo Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 So basically they're whitewashing Hogan from history. Not that the Hulkster is white, being orange skinned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 It's been 2 days. I think any speculation that he's going to get the permanent "Benoit treatment" is very premature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Hogan said what he said and will have to deal with the results of his words, which we all do in various ways everyday. My sticking point (which I wouldn't label outrage) was WWE taking such a cheap route to distance themselves when the situation calls for a more thoughtful response considering Hogan's stature and wrestling's own history of racial issues. Whitewashing Hulk from their history makes them seem awfully delusional and self-interested, as if not acknowledging his existence moving ahead somehow reflects well on them as a company. As much as they hate the low-brow perception of the company, the right response could help combat that. They need to get out of their own way sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Thread Killer Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 So basically they're whitewashing Hogan from history. Not that the Hulkster is white, being orange skinned. Exactly. What the WWE is doing is a clear case of prejudice and racism towards orange people. You can't just erase these poor leather skinned people from history. I can only hope that George Hamilton publicly comes out in support of Hogan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Hogan said what he said and will have to deal with the results of his words, which we all do in various ways everyday. My sticking point (which I wouldn't label outrage) was WWE taking such a cheap route to distance themselves when the situation calls for a more thoughtful response considering Hogan's stature and wrestling's own history of racial issues. Whitewashing Hulk from their history makes them seem awfully delusional and self-interested, as if not acknowledging his existence moving ahead somehow reflects well on them as a company. As much as they hate the low-brow perception of the company, the right response could help combat that. They need to get out of their own way sometimes. Well said. Amazing to me, it even made news in France : http://bigbrowser.blog.lemonde.fr/2015/07/24/en-pleine-tempete-mediatique-le-catcheur-hulk-hogan-renvoye-de-la-wwe/ (and believe me, Le Monde is an extremely serious newspaper) http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2015/07/25/hulk-hogan-renvoye-propos-racistes_n_7869868.html http://people.bfmtv.com/actualite-people/le-celebre-catcheur-hulk-hogan-renvoye-de-la-wwe-pour-des-propos-juges-racistes-903962.html (likewise, very serious medias) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 The thing is Hogan IS wrestling history, so how can they erase him? There is no feasible way of discussing wrestling from 1983 to about 2001 without acknowledging Hogan. It would be like trying to do a history of the 20th Century without mentioning Hitler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Also, they can try to push the Legend of Stone Cold or the Legend of HBK as much as they want. To the vast majority of the world, Hogan is still their biggest star. He was almost on par with Molly Ringwald in the 80s for God's sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fando Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Given that Hogan knew what was on the tape for years and apparently never mentioned it to WWE (unless you believe they would have went ahead and put him on Tough Enough etc), how personally Vince takes these scandals, and how this is already blowing back on the company and its history, wether the commentators on it are misinformed or not doesn't matter, I could see them following through on a longer "distancing" period just out of spite for how badly he fucked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.