CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
6.5/10
4.5 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
El juicio entre Hulk Hogan y Gawker Media enfrentó derechos de privacidad contra la libertad de prensa y planteó preguntas importantes. Un examen de los peligros y deberes de la prensa libre... Leer todoEl juicio entre Hulk Hogan y Gawker Media enfrentó derechos de privacidad contra la libertad de prensa y planteó preguntas importantes. Un examen de los peligros y deberes de la prensa libre en una era de desigualdad.El juicio entre Hulk Hogan y Gawker Media enfrentó derechos de privacidad contra la libertad de prensa y planteó preguntas importantes. Un examen de los peligros y deberes de la prensa libre en una era de desigualdad.
- Premios
- 4 nominaciones en total
Emily Gould
- Self - Former Editor-in-Chief, Gawker.com
- (material de archivo)
Pamela Campbell
- Self - Judge
- (material de archivo)
Bubba the Love Sponge
- Self - Radio Host
- (material de archivo)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Although fairly interesting, it's very muddled and unfocused, and very biased. Lots of interviews with the press-side, hearing their opinions, but nothing but others footage from anyone else making for a very one sided argument. No matter who is right or wrong, it makes for a very biased film.
Using Gawnker as a 1st amendment example may not be entirely suitable.
First the Tabloid headlines are rather disgusted than admirable. Personally, I would not be drawn any attentions to its website not mentioning to read the contents. Secondly posting someone's sex tape even brought more gray areas. Subsequently, its bona fide intention became blurry and unpersuasive. It could have started with a well known media instead. However, there would be presentably much bigger challenges since most main stream ones including FOX News already have mighty legal teams to fend out such allegations. So I would say it's not a well thought out documentary. The idea was applicable. But its implementation lacked effectiveness.
Basically, Gawnker is not a media public would think has its value in the society. It essentially leeched on human ethics. Nevertheless. 1st amendment protects all voices even dark, unpleasant ones. This documentary might convey such a message. However, I am the least convinced of their innocence and that is the problem.
First the Tabloid headlines are rather disgusted than admirable. Personally, I would not be drawn any attentions to its website not mentioning to read the contents. Secondly posting someone's sex tape even brought more gray areas. Subsequently, its bona fide intention became blurry and unpersuasive. It could have started with a well known media instead. However, there would be presentably much bigger challenges since most main stream ones including FOX News already have mighty legal teams to fend out such allegations. So I would say it's not a well thought out documentary. The idea was applicable. But its implementation lacked effectiveness.
Basically, Gawnker is not a media public would think has its value in the society. It essentially leeched on human ethics. Nevertheless. 1st amendment protects all voices even dark, unpleasant ones. This documentary might convey such a message. However, I am the least convinced of their innocence and that is the problem.
A rocky start using a company that is just horrible and awful to human beings with a few good staffers, later takes a look at another company and a group of people who have nothing but my upmost respect for the work they do.
Frustrating but interesting.
Frustrating but interesting.
For the most part, this is an engaging documentary. But despite its marketing, "Nobody Speak" isn't really about the Bollea v. Gawker case. Sure, the trial gets plenty of screen time (in all its salacious and uncomfortable glory) but this is really about behind-the-scenes funding; the billionaire with a grudge against Gawker, the baron who buys out the Las Vegas newspaper to suppress unfavorable reporting. These are moneyed villains that beg to be reviled. Even His Trumpness is involved in a final segment that feels wholly supplemental) after waging a war on "Fake News".
The movie loses steam when it moves away from Peter Thiel and Gawker (its strongest segment) to broaden the support of the Fourth Estate. But on the whole, it's not bad.
6/10
The movie loses steam when it moves away from Peter Thiel and Gawker (its strongest segment) to broaden the support of the Fourth Estate. But on the whole, it's not bad.
6/10
Spin doctoring and fake news exists on both conservative and liberal outlets. This documentary is a PRIME example of the very thing it argues against because it spins against conservatives only. Shameful.
Our free press clearly has a credibility problem.
Our free press clearly has a credibility problem.
¿Sabías que…?
- ConexionesReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 619: Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 35 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (2017) officially released in India in English?
Responda