F Charles C. Johnson ‘ I L LE 9* ~ DEC 09 2015 ‘ 32'“ . “I In Propria Persona I] 5‘ FRESNO SUPERIOR COURT Eg— HIM. DEPUTY i SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO we «905’ mu337‘A3 CHARLES C. JOHNSON, . . And' CasetNo.’: GOT NEWS, LLC, Plaintiffs COMPLAINT vs. GAWKER MEDIA, LLC, Hold Service: Gawker Media LLC 210 Elizabeth St. 4th Floor New York, NY 10012 And vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvVvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv J.K. TROTTER, in his individual capacity Hold Service: Gawker Media 114 5th Ave. New York, NY 10012 Kggllfde~x And GREG HOWARD, in his individual capacity Hold Service: Gawker Media 114 5th Ave: New York, NY 10012 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ “led mm Comp 169166 CFL Ch!“ \\\\\\\\\ Defendants. ) COMPLAINT FOR DEFAMATION, INJURIOUS FALSEHOOD, AND INVASION OF PRIVACY (FALSE LIGHT) COMES NOW Plaintiffs Charles C. Johnson and Got News LLC, CD\IO\UIII>UJNH by and through his undersigned counsel, and for his First Amended Complaint against Defendants Gawker Media LLC, ("Gawker”)v 10 (collectively, "Defendants"), states as follows: JURISDICTION AND VENUE ll 12 J.K. Trotter ("Trotter") and Greg Howard ("Howard") Because Plaintiffs are residents of the State of California l3 and have been injured in the State of California, the matter is 14 properly before this court. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 15 16 17 18 19 1.. president and owner of Got News, LLC, a media company which owns Gotnews.com, a news and commentary website. 2. 20 21 Plaintiff Charles C. Johnson is a journalist and the Plaintiff Charles C. Johnson has never before initiated a lawsuit for defamation. 22 3. Defendant Gawker Media LLC, is a corporation organized existing under the laws of the state of Delaware with its 23 -and 24 primary place of business located in New York, New York. 25 26 27 28 4. Defendant J.K. Trotter, upon information and belief, is a resident of the state of New York. 5. Defendant Greg Howard, upon information and belief, is a resident of the state of New York. 2 6. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants Trotter and Howard were employed as journalists by Defendant Gawker. 7. mummpI—I As a threshold matter, Plaintiff hereby incorporates herein by reference, Exhibits 1—42 as if fully stated herein. An index of exhibits is included after the signature block of this Complaint. 8. As a threshold matter, unless specifically stated 10 otherwise, all factual allegations are upon information and 11 belief. 12 9. Defendant Gawker owns a family of tightly—linked, l3 internet—based media properties, with sub—brands that are each, 14 individually and collectively marketed by Gawker. 15 16 17 10. Among the media properties owned and marketed by Gawker are Deadspin.com and Gawker’s flagship site, Gawker.com. 11. 18 Upon information and belief, the Gawker online media 19 properties have in excess of sixty—four million (64,000,000) 20 unique monthly readers in the United States.1 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 12. Gawker had approximately 540,000 twitter followers in December of 2014. 13. Per Quantcast, Gawker Media has over One Million unique Missouri readers. 14. Gawker’s media properties, such as the properties mentioned above, contain a variety of content. For example, 28 1 http://advertising.gawker.com/about/ last accessed June 17, 2015. 3 Deadspin.com is primarily a sports news and sports commentary website. The remaining properties may have different topical focuses, but each carries content primarily consisting of news ONUTID-LAJN and commentary. 15. Gawker earns revenue, among other ways, by selling advertising on its media properties. 16. Gawker has over a million readers in Missouri, as evidenced Quantcast data showing Gawker.com’s web traffic. 10 17. Gawker properties have endlessly written about the ll Ferguson riots and related topics,1 including publishing articles 12 highly critical of Plaintiffs’ efforts in investigative l3 journalism regarding various "Ferguson" topics.2 14 15 l6 17 18. .Further, Deadspin.com, a Gawker media property dedicated to sports, famously, viciously, repeatedly, and continuously, attacked the St. Louis Cardinals recently.3 18 19 See, James West, 1 “Gawker Took Only One Day to Report and Vet the Story That Blew Up in Its Face,” published 20 http://wwwmotherjones.com/media/2015/07/gawker-conde-nast—fallout— by Mother Jones on July 24, 2015. 21 timeline-denton. 22 2 See, e.g., A.J. Daulerio, “The Story Behind the Stories You Loved This Year: Hulk Hogan’s Mesmorizing Sex 23 Tape,” published by gawker.com on December 26, 2012. http://gawker.com/5971314/the—story-behind—the—stories- 24 you-loved—this—year—hulk—hogans-mesmerizing—sex-tape. 25 3 26 accessed October 4, 2015); 27 (http://deadspin.com/why-your—cardinals—suck-1443513646 28 Drew Magary, “Eat Shit, Cardinals” June 16, M 2015 (http://deadspin.com/eat—shit—cardinals—1711726377 Drew Magary, “Why last Cardinals Suck,” October 10, 2013 last accessed October 4, 2015) (emphasis added); Seems To Be Ley, “Everyone Involved In The Cardinals Hacking Scandal An Idiot,” (http://deadspin.com/everyone— involved-in—the—cardinals—hacking—scandal-seem—171 1682201 last accessed October 4, 2015); 4 Tom Samer Kalaf, “Report: Tracking technology currently exists which allows 19. advertisers on media websites to track readers’ age, gender, location, and many other data points.1 After working for a time as a reporter for the 20. Financial Times, Nick Denton founded Gawker in 2003. OKOOONmU'IvhUJNl-l Denton’s goal was to change journalism by turning 21. ordinary people into content creators:2 Denton admits that the journalistic standards of his blogs are lower than those in traditional media. But, he says, that‘s the whole point of the venture. "We go after sacred cows. We run stories on the basis of one anonymous source, in many cases, and a bit of judgment. We put it out there. We make clear the level of confidence we have in a story. We ask for help {from site visitors], we Similarly, %kbumnmmmmmwe%kmmkmmsEmwnmmmmwmawmkmpmgfis it‘s not meant to be final. It's like a reporter's notebook." Concurrent with starting Gawker, Denton also began a 22. pornography blog (also featuring hardcore porn) called "Fleshbot" which is part of the Gawker empire. NNNNNNNNNHI—‘Hl—‘i—‘i—‘i—‘Hi—‘i—l FBI Investigates the St. Louis Cardinals For Hacking the Astros,” June 16, 2015 (http://deadspin.corn/report-fl)i- investigates-st—louis—cardinals—for—hackin—171 1673515, last accessed October 4, 2015); Drew Magary, “Moron USA oouowmpHouomqmmpi—I Today Columnist Thinks The Cardinals Poop Vanilla Sprinkle,” March today-columnist—thinks—the—cardinals-poop—van—1689616561, 1For example, see Plaintiffs’ Ex. 41, which is last This ad clearly which knows 2 is marketing to Plaintiffs’ that Plaintiffs’ counsel is 2015 (http://deadspin.com/moron—usa— accessed October 4, 2015). a screenshot taken by Plaintiffs’ counsel gawker.com’s home page (www.gawker.com) on Sunday, October marketing “Budweiser Brewery Experience 5, 4, when he visited 2015. Note that there is an ad on the page SAINT LOUIS - This Tour’s For You - BudweiserTours.com” counsel because the gawker.com technology gurus have tracking tech a reader, viewing the site Excerpt from, J ay Rayner, “The Brit Dishing The Dirt from St. Louis, Missouri. On America,” The Guardian, Sunday 9 March 2008. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/mar/09/gawker 5 (last accessed Oct. 9. 2015). Denton’s first big hits were as a result of publishing 23. private sex tapes of public figures. For example, the infamous Paris Hilton sex tape.1 Denton told The Hollywood Reporter in 2013 in an 24. CD\IO\U1J>UJNH article entitled, "Gawker’s Nick Denton Explains Why Invasion of Privacy Is Positive for Society":2 THE: When you started Gawker, did you have an idea that you were going to change things? Denton: Yeah‘ The basic concept was twoiournalists 10 ll 12 13 14 15 interesting than in a bar teliing each other a story that’s much more whatever hits the papers the next day. V THR: Do you think journalists censor themselves? I Denton: Well, used to think it had to do with legai reasons and people being too fearful of libel. But actually, now think the larger factor is a journalist's desire for respectability - not wanting to expose themselves, not i I wanting to say, "Hey we've heard this, we’re not completely sure whether it‘s true." People are talking about this. We‘rejust going to share with you as we would share with our colleagues what we have. THR: What have you learned along the way? Denton: We‘ve removed a 16 lot of obstacles to free journalism and yet - l8 me and to everyone we work with. We want to get right. Our standards for getting right are different from larger, more established institutions, and we do not just throw out every tip that we get on the site. We evaluate and report 19 Dentonlhat Cook: There is still the desire to be l7 That is stiil important to it it is a disagreement between us. That’s a disagreement hetWeen me and a lot of ourjournalists is more of the tips to be published, Maybe not published under John’s name but published under a tipster‘s name or under a tipster's anonymous handle. would like them to be published. that would like 20 I i 21 25. 22 23 right. The excerpt demonstrates the operating principle of Gawker: publish sensational rumors — regardless of whether or 24 25 Excerpt from, Jay Rayner, “The Brit Dishing The Dirt On America,” The Guardian, Sunday 9 March 2008. 26 1 27 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/mar/09/gawker 28 2 (last accessed Oct. 9. 2015). May 22, 2013, by Eriq Gardner (http://www.h01lywoodreporter.com/thr—csq/gawkers—nick-denton—explains—why— 526548 last accessed October 8, 2015). not Gawker has any possible way of establishing the truth or falsity of the claim. 26. ONU'IiP-UJNl—l Denton has admitted that his site has lower journalistic standards than “traditional media." 27. Nick Denton has made clear that Gawker relies upon readers of his site to provide content for his site — in other words, that his readers are collaborators on articles:1 The future, Nick says, lies with, what he calls iterative reporting, in which posts are used to request information and to help stand up stories. ’As a print journalist, if you hear a rumour you try to stand it up and if you can't the story dies,‘ he says. 'With a blog you can throw the rumour out there and ask for help. You can say: "We don't know if this is true or not.” What about libel? 'We just have to make sure we’re not doing it maliciously and that we also admit when we're wrong. Personally, as a print journalist, I always found the most interesting stories to be the ones hacks talked about in the bar after work. Those are the ones we deal in.‘ He goes further, talking about how he wants his readers to be the source of '1 want to stories, how they’ll split page-view bonuses with them if the story runs. institutionalise and automate chequebook journalism.‘ 10 ll 12 l3 14 16 In 2006, Gawker initiated a feature on the site called “Gawker Stalker,"2 which allowed the readership of the website to 17 "crowdsource"3 the geographic loCations of celebrities in "real— 18 time."4 15 28. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29. The feature tied—into Google Maps and allowed users to pinpoint the locations, much to the terror of celebrities. 1 James Silver, “Gawk, Don ’t Talk - Interview With Nick Denton,” The Guardian, Monday 11 December 2006 (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/dec/1 1/news.mondaymediasection E last accessed October 9, 2015). We Won’t.” published John Cook, entitled “A Judge Told Us to Take Down Our Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Post. http://gawker.com/a—judge—told-us—to-take—down—our—hu1kby gawker.com on April 25, 2013, available online at gawker.com on hogan—sex—tape—po—481328088 and Jessica, entitled “Introducing Gawker Stalker,” published by 2 2006, available at http://gawker.com/160338/introducing—gawker—stalker—maps. ideas, or “Crowdsourcing” has been defined by Merriam-Webster as: “The practice of obtaining needed services, rather community online the from especially and content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people last (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crowdsourcing than from traditional employees or suppliers.” March 3 14, accessed Oct. 9, 2015). takes place.” “Real Time” has been defined by Merriam-Webster as, “The actual time during which something 2015). Oct. 9, (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/real%20time last accessed 4 7 Despite obvious concerns for the safety of individual public figures.1 30. ONU'IABUJN Denton was extremely pleased with the scandal surrounding the new feature, because it made Gawker a great deal of money.2 31. Specifically, Denton was pleased because subsequent to the creation of Gawker Stalker, celebrities such as George Clooney publicly attacked the feature because they feared being 10 stalked, generating free publicity, clicks, and traffic for 11 Gawker. 12 13 32. sites.3 14 15 16 17 Kinja is a news content aggregator across Gawker 33. It allows Readers as well as paid Gawker Staff to create user profiles, chat real time, comment on news articles, and create unique blogs — which can sometimes become so popular 18 it by other users that Gawker will co—opt the blog and bring 19 into the Gawker family. 20 34. In essence, Kinja removes virtually all distinctions 21 between paid staff content and unpaid staff content. And this is 22 vision:4 by design, because it is part of Nick Denton’s 23 24_ 25 26 27 28 1 Celebrities are already at high risk without Gawker creating a de facto'GPS tracking device. John Lennon, born October 9, 1940, was shot and killed by a deranged fan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_John_Lennon (last accessed October 9, 2015). By way of example, ’ “Gawk, Don’t Talk — Interview With Nick Denton," The Guardian, Monday 11 December 2006 October 9, 2015). (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/dec/l l/news.mondaymediasection last accessed 2James 3 Silver, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinja (last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). http://product.kinja.com/introducing—group— Excerpt from Nick Denton, “Introducing Group Chats In Kinja,” chats—in—kinja-l517330082. February 6, 2014. Last accessed Oct. 8, 2015. 4 8 Messaging applications are the standard for personal communication: swift, stripped down and lively. Kinja is an effort to apply the same quaiities to public sites whether from Gawker writers, partner publishers or solo bloggers. feature at its It is a collaborative journalism platform with the following heart, What we call the group char. Each group chat has an instigator, typically but not necessarily the blog owner or one of their authors. The instigator can launch a topic with a news or opinion piece with a headline; or just with a question to another user. CD\IO\U'I»I>UJN Even a long and exhaustive format. We believe this conversational format will encourage the story to 11 develop and the truth to be tested. 12 13 15 16 17 18 35. As the above excerpt demonstrates, Kinja is the realization of Denton’s dream of removing the barrier between "author" and reader. 36. Gawker believes that the news will, long term, become entirely dependent upon crowdsourcing:1 19 (1) 20 Crowd~sourcing / coliaboration / socialization of everything As with many other sectors, the news will become increasingly depending on gathering information from every person possible, especially those who 21 have firsthand accounts of an event or those who are experts in the topic being discussion. How can we highlight and maximize this in our system? 22 23 24 25 should be just a starting point. Sites on the latest Kinja template display subsequent discussion with the same graphical treatment and respect as the author‘s starter post. The exchange should read like a question—and-answer session, the classic web chat 10 14 article 37. Paid or unpaid by Gawker, all content creators are 26 statistically ranked by how much traffic they bring to Gawker’s 27' sites.1 28 1 Maggie Rose, “World Future Part 4: The Future of Kinja,” Aug. future-2015-part-4—the-future—of—kinja—17263757l9 (last 5, 2015 http://maggierosetao.kinja.com/world- accessed Oct. 9 9, 2015). 38. J.K. Trotter and Greg Howard, paid content creators for Gawker/Kinja as well as Defendants in this case, are ranked at 97th and unranked, respectively.2 39. “Collin Krum," on the other hand, is an unpaid content creator, as is Kevin Purdy, who are ranked 117 and 115 OKDmNONU'lQ-UJNH respectively.3 40. Collaboration between paid and unpaid content creators is central to Gawker’s media strategy, and crucial from both a content creation standpoint as well as a marketing standpoint. 41. "Gawker executives introduced a "Kinja bonus," modeled after the unique bonus,4 in an effort to boost writers’ engagement with the comments."5 42. To circumvent liability for anonymous tipsters, Gawker has not only created tutorials for unpaid content creator collaborators to leak information without fear of defamation NNNNNNNNNI—‘I—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘I—‘l—‘H suit repercussions (see infra), but Gawker has actually designed, as part of its Kinja platform, specific tools to avoid CD\IO\U1»I>WNHOKOGJ\IO\U1J>WNH liability for defamation actions — burner accounts and Gawker SecureDrop. l 2 3 See http://gawker.com/stats/leaderboard (last accessed Oct. 10, 2015). 1d. Id. Paid writers get a bonus for the number of unique visitors they bring to Gawker sites. New York Times,” See Caitlin Petre, “The Traffic Factories: Metrics at Chartbeat, Gawker Media, and The http://towcenter.org/research/trafficpublished by Tow Center for Digital Journalism on May 7, 2015, available at 4 5 factories/. 10 A "burner account" is an anonymous Kinja user profile 43. wherein Gawker does not store any personally identifying information about the user. 44. In "How to Leak to Gawker Anonymously,”1 a Gawker "how dime-mm to" article written by Defendant J.K. Trotter, Trotter describes variety of alternatives for the would—be tipster to circumvent a liability for defamation. 45. 10 ll In it, Trotter instructs tipsters to use Gawker’s "SecureDrop," and he hyperlinks to a Gawker site which carries a "how—to" article specific to using "SecureDrop.”2 12 46. In the case before this Court, the anonymous unpaid l3 content creator collaborator commenters at issue used "burner 14 accounts," to protect their anonymity. 15 l6 17 18 47. Gawker "SecureDrop" is carefully and deliberately devised means for anonymous tipsters to totally circumvent defamation liability. ("maximizing your anonymity and 19 frustrating any attempts (including by [Gawker]) to identify 20 [the Tipster] as the source"). 21 22 23 48. that a Conde Nast executive3 24 25 26 27 28 In July of 2015, Gawker published an article alleging I J .K. Trotter, (last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). “Welcome to the Gawker Media SecureDrop.” Undated. https://gawkermediagroup.com/securedrop/ Oct. 9, 2015). 3 David Geithner, brother of former “How to Leak to Gawker Anonymously,” August 8, 2014. http://gawker.com/how-to-leak-to—gawker— anonymously-1613394137 2 — Media titan Conde Nast Keeping its Sleaze Game (last a direct competitor of Gawker. See Erik Wemple, “Conde Nast Exec Story: in Shape,” The Washington Post, July 17, 2015 is ll accessed Gawker is Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner — had solicited sex from a homosexual escort. ' 49. David Geithner is publicly heterosexual, married, and the father of three young children.1 CDQONU'lsD-UJNH 50. Reports surfaced that the article might have been based on false accusations, a hoax even.2 51. Even if true, Geithner was a limited public figure at 52. There had been no previous public knowledge of best. 10 ll Geithner’s sexuality as anything other than heterosexual. 12 53. Subsequent to the publication of the Gawker piece l3 purporting to "out" Geithner as a closet homosexual, other media 14 outlets began to scrutinize Gawker’s reporting of the story. 15 l6 17 18 54. prostitute and porn star Leif Derek Truitt (porn alias Brodie Sinclair) — a man the Gawker article referred to as "Ryan." 55. 19 20 The source of the article was the alleged gay Other news outlets interviewed "Ryan" and revealed him to be a deeply troubled man with paranoid delusions.3 21 22 23 24 25 26 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/20l5/07/17/00nde—nast—exec—story—gawker—is-keeping—itsaccessed Oct. 9, 2015) Nast’s CF0 Tried to Pay $2,500 for a Night with a Gay Porn Star,” Gawker, July 16, Jordan Sargent, “Conde 2015 ( article has been removed from site but is available at https://archive.is/En0#selection-11980-12000 last accessed Oct. 6, 2015). 2 2015 Charles Johnson, “Is The Gawker Story An Elaborate Hoax? Sure Looks That Way," GotNews.com July 17, sleaze—game—in—shape/ last I 27 (http://www.gotnews.com/breaking—exclusive—is—the—gawker—story-an—elaborate—hoax-sure-looks—that—way/ 28 3 last accessed Oct. 10, 2015). Chuck Ross, “Interview With The Gay Porn Star Behind That Terrible Gawker Article," The Daily Caller, July 17, 2015 (http://dailycaller.com/20l 5/07/17/exclusive—interview-with—the-gay—porn-star—behind-that—terrible-gawker— article/ last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 12 I 56. Worse, upon further investigation, it became likely Ryan’s motivation for contacting Gawker, might have been to blackmail Geithner.l 57. CD\IONU1J>WNJ— Gawker had taken ONE WORKDAY to investigate, vet, and publish the article on the Geithner "sex scandal."2 58. Gawker’s actions demonstrated that the rush to publish clearly outweighed any concern for the accuracy of the reporting. 10 59. In criticizing Gawker’s coverage of the Geithner 11 story, the Washington Post said: "Shadowy encounters plus 12 possible criminal activity plus high—ranking official in the 13 classic New York industry of publishing equal a pretty automatic l4 editor decision at the gossip site. Publish! The rest of the 15 16 17 18 world, meanwhile, screams in condemnation..."3 60. “Ryan” believes the end of the world is near because since 1980 the numbers 666 have been selected as the winning 19 lottery number 25 times; that 9/11 was carried out by the 20 Russian government; that Barack Obama is the “son of the devil;" 21 that he ("Ryan") has ultra secret information that he must 22 release to the media about who really is responsible for the 23 24 25 26 27 28 l Is Robby Soave, “Gawker Helps Gay Escort Blackmail Timothy Geithner’s Brother, Ted Cruz the Hero of the (https://reason.com/blog/2015/07/17/gawker—helps—gay-escort—blackmailStory,” Reason Magazine, July 17, 2015 2015). timoth last accessed Oct, 9, ” 2 One Day to Report and Vet the Story That Blew Up in Its Face, Mother Jones, “Gawker James West, Took Only 5/07/gawker—conde—nast—fallout—timeline—denton last Friday July 24, 2015 (http://www.motherjones.com/media/20 l accessed October 9, 2015). 3 in Shape,” The Washington Post, July Erik Wemple, “Conde Nast Exec Story: Gawker is Keeping its Sleaze Game (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/ZO15/07/17/conde—nast—exec—story—gawker—is— 17, 2015 keeping—its—sleaze—game—in—shape/ last accessed Oct. 9, 2015) 13 Pennsylvania train crash of May 2015, and the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370.15 hUnfortunately, I’m just a guy who has a lot of 61. information. Cb\lO\U1Il->UJNH I wish I didn’t," was llRyan’s" explanation to one news outlet.2 Gawker founder Nick Denton, in explaining its decision 62. to take down the story, gave a non—apology apology, apologizing merely for being insensitive, and for arguably participating in OKO }_ "gay—shaming.”3 benton issued a weak—hearted apology, but also stated, 63. 11 12 "The point of [the Geithner sex scandal story] was not in my 13 View sufficient to offset the embarrassment to the subject and 14 his family."4 15 16 17 18 A former Gawker writer, Current vanity Fair 64. contributor Richard Lawson, publicly admitted that during his time at Gawker he fabricated stories.5 Lawson has said, "When 65. 19 I was at Gawker I wrote 20 baseless posts accusing an actor of raping an ex—boyfriend. 21 did it [because] my boss told me to, but I I wanted to, too.”6 22 23 24 25 26 ‘27 28 1 Chuck Ross, “Interview With The Gay Porn Star Behind That Terrible Gawker Article,” The Daily Caller, July 17, 2015 (http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/17/exclusive—interview-with-the—gay—porn-star—behind—that—terrible—gawker— article/ last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 2 3 M. Nick Denton, “Taking a Post Down,” July accessed Oct. 4 9, 17, 2015 (http://nick.kinja.com/taking—a—post—down—1718581684 last 2015). Id. 17, Womack, “Anyone Else Think James Franco Should Sue the Hell Out of Gawker," Huffington Post, July last accessed Oct. 10, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-womack/james—franco—gawker_b_7816032.html 2015 5 Larry 2015) 6 Id. 14 66. The fabricated articles Lawson referenced were a series of articles he wrote which accused actor James Franco of (a) being a closeted homosexual, and (b) having ggpgg a man and ibWN then paid the victim to keep him quiet. 67. mNmU’l herein as Exhibits 3—7. 68. 10 The articles by Lawson are attached and incorporated In a third article, entitled, "The People Have Spoken, And They Think James Franco is a Rapist,"1 Lawson concludes, based upon the polling he did from the commenters in the ll previous post, that James Franco is the rapist that The New York 12 Post was reporting on. l3 14 15 16 69. A month later, in a fourth article entitled, "’Gay Rapist’ Actor Surprisingly Cool About His Sexuality,”2 Lawson again revisited the topic: James Franco gay or what? You‘ll remember there was that cannons rumor that he once raped his gay iover that was sort of intense and icky. Six blind item, about We‘re told that the original tip that prompted the an actor who broke into his «ex—boyfriend‘s house an sexually assaulted Is '17 ne 18 19 him, mentioned Franco 20 specifically. We received several other anonymous (and admittedly questionable) emails saying the same thing, one providing tumor explicit details. So who the heck knows, but for whatever reason the had traction. Which makes us queasy. But now the actor is on the cover of Get magazine this month, acting cairn, collected, and confident in his 21 22 23 heterosexuality, so we're 24 70. 25 all confused again. In the interview, he discusses The excerpt above alleges several things: 26 Gawker, August 22, 2008 27 Richard Lawson, “The People Have Spoken And They Think James Franco Is a (http://gawker.com/5040524/the-people-have—spoken—and-they—think-james-franco—is—a—rapist 28 2015). Rapist,” 1 last accessed Oct. 10, Gawker, September 29, 2008 Richard Lawson, “‘Gay Rapist’ Actor Surprisingly Cool About His Sexuality,” (http://gawker.com/5056330/gay-rapist—actor-surprisingly-cool-about-his-sexuality last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 2 15 that there was an ominous rumor that Franco once raped his gay lover; (a) that Gawker, Lawson or both received some information from some source to suggest that the original New York Post article about the unknown actor come gay rapist was actually based on a "tip" from a source, and that in the original telling of the "tip" the actor—culprit was reported to be Franco; (b) CJLOCD\IO'\U' vl>CMI\Jl-- that Gawker, Lawson or both have received multiple anonymous emails which, although questionable in their reliability, nevertheless name Franco as the unknown gay rapist from the New York Post article; (c) Lawson states that he doesn’t know if the rumor about Franco is true, but that the rumor had "traction"; (d) that the rumor makes Lawson and possibly other Gawker staff “queasy”; and (e) that Gawker staff or Lawson or both are uncertain as to Franco’s true sexuality, given his decision to grace the cover of "Out" Magazine.1 (f) 71. NMNNNNNNNl—‘l—‘l—‘I—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘H Lawson knew, because he fabricated the entire story, that any anonymous emails naming Franco as the gay rapist were mQONLNIhWNHOKOCDQONmrtl—l not only questionable, but were actually false. 72. The tone of this article is one of reporting on actual events. 73. Despite directly expressing belief that Franco was a "gay rapist," Lawson’s presentation of facts is deliberately misleading and was designed to perpetuate a rumor that Franco was a "gay rapist." of a popular gay and lesbian fashion, entertainment, and lifestyle magazine, with the highest circulation Oct. accessed last any gay monthly publication in the United States.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_(magazine) 1 Out, “is 10,2015) 16 74. Gawker published (the author was simply listed as “Gawker Sources") an article in March of 2012 entitled, "Which Beloved Comedian Likes to Force Female Comics to Watch Him Jerk Off?"1 The article recounts anonymous tips that some unnamed 75. mummawm comedian — "our nation’s most hilarious stand—up comic and critically cherished sitcom auteur m traps unsuspecting women in his hotel room and makes them stick around until he’s done 10 [masturbating].” 76. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 recounting a story about the same unnamed comedian from the "Aspen Film Festival a few years ago" wherein the unnamed comedian trapped two women in a hotel room and forced them to watch him masturbate. 77. 22 23 24 Thereafter, as the article explains, the unnamed comedian’s "extremely powerful” manager contacted the women and threatened to destroy their careers if they complained. 20 21 The article went on to give additional details, 78. The article detailed attempts to reach out to one of the unnamed victims, but the Victim refused to comment, stating I don’t only, l’first of all, your facts are wrong. And secondly, want to be,a part of this story. I’m sure you understand."2 25 26 27 28 I Gawker March, Comics Watch Him Jerk Ofl," Gawker, Sources, “Which Beloved Comedian Likes to Force Female 2012 (http://gawker.com/5894527/which-beloved-comedian—likes-to—force—female—comics—to—watch-him- 19, jerk-officommenF48089921 last accessed Oct. 9, 2015.) 2hi l7 to Subsequently, in May of 2015, Gawker’s subsidiary blog 79. WNH Jordan website called "Defamer"1 published an article written by His Sargent entitled, "Louis C.K. Will Call You Up To Talk About Alleged Sexual Misconduct.”2 The article introduces an unnamed source given the 80. OKDCDQO‘IU'IVP pseudonym "Jason." “Jason” explained that two female friends of his had 81. described been mistreated by Louis C.K., but the only incident 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Louis C.K. by "Jason" is supposedly from 2014, wherein purportedly came up behind the one friend, grabbed her by the back of the neck and whispered, "I’m going to fuck you.” having had 82. On the basis of this, Jason is reported as accuses an email communication with Louis C.K.,3 wherein Jason Jason for his C.K. of sexual assault and C.K. responds by asking telephone number. The section written by paid:Gawker—content—creators 83. 20 unpaid— does not accuse Louis C.K. However, many anonymous, content—creators (Kinja commenters) do name Louis C.K. in the 21 2012 article. In fact, the 2015 article cites as evidence, 22 comments by unpaid—content—creator—commenters on the 2012 19 23 24 article: 25 I 26 27 28 “Defamer” is a subsidiary blog within the Gawker family of sites. The content theme is self-explanatory. http://defamer.gawker.com. 2 His Alleged Sexual Misconduct," Defamer-Gawker, Jordan Sargent, “Louis C.K. Will Call You Up to Talk About last 2015 (http://defamer.gawker.com/louis-c—k—will-call-you-up—to-talk—about—his-alleged-s—1687820755 May 5, accessed Oct. 9, 2015). as the actual email address purportedly The article published screenshots of the supposed emails with C.K. as well belonging to Louis C.K. 3 18 This was not the first allegation of sexual misconduct levied against C.K. In March of 2012, we ran a blind item titled “Which Beloveti Comedian hikes described an to liaise Female Comics to Watch Him Eerie GER” which prior incident that had supposedly taken place in Aspen a few years involving “our nation’s most hilarious stand—up comic and critically cherished sitcom auteur.” and two 84. unnamed female comedians: The article cites to "Barberaham Lincoln," an independent content creator who claims to have a great deal of comedy industry insider knowledge, but without any substantiation whatsoever. ll 85. The article closed by mentioning additional 12 unsuccessful attempts to corroborate the allegations as being l3 properly against Louis C.K. The attempts purportedly failed because "Jason’s" female friends who were assaulted refused to 14 15 16 17 18 come forward, citing their fear of C.K.’s power in the comedy industry. 86. The article says that thereafter, the two men had a 19 vacuous phone conversation, wherein, C.K. was "sizing [Jason] 20 up’ to ’find out what I had heard.’” 21 22 23 24 25 87. The article closes with a call to action, asking unpaid content creator commenters to comment with any information they have. 88. The Louis C.K. articles compared with the previous 27 described ethical lapses, supra, represent a pattern at Gawker: recklessly publishing sensational claims (e.g., rape, sexual 28 assault, serial rape and sexual assault) which carry the 26 19 prospect of career destruction1 on the basis of weak, unsubstantiated tips. 89. A further pattern is using their anonymous—unpaid— content—creator—commenters as sources in their own right, but CD\IO\U' l>-UJNl-' which in effect amounts to Gawker citing to itself. In this way, Gawker can be the source of the rumor, 90. based and then repeatedly earn revenue on subsequent articles upon the rumor it itself initiated. 1o 11 12 91. Gawker’s sites offer readers, paid Gawker staff, and others an opportunity to create cdntent on the individual web pages carrying stand—alone writings of a particular subject , 13 matter. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 92. The stand—alone writings are consciously and deliberately initiated by journalists such as Defendants Trotter and Howard. 93. The only restrictions on the content created by the readers, is that readers cannot initiate the stand—alone — first come, writings, their content is placed on the webpage the" first serve —. beneath the portion of the writing begun by kept‘ initiator, and their content creation is subject to being of the under a removable veil until "approval" by the initiator stand—alone writing. Readers can, at their own option, lift the veil and View the content created by non-initiating content creators, 94. 28 1 See generally, Bill Cosby. 20 regardless of whether or not the stand—alone writing’s initiator approves or disapproves of the content. 95. In order to create content, a non—initiating content creator muSt create a content creator profile titled under their mummpww real name or under a pseudonym. 96. It is very common for non—initiating content creators to create anonymous profiles, or even multiple anonymous profiles. -1O 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 97. It is very common for initiators of writings (such as Defendants Howard and Trotter) to create content amongst other non-initiating content creators, and to directly respond—to and collaborate with non-initiating content creators, instigate and solicit responses from non—initiating content creators, and of adopt the conclusions of or otherwise advertise or approve the content of non—initiating content creators as signified 19 through text content or by hyperlinking1 to additional locations on the same webpage or the webpages of other stand—alone 20 writings. 18 21 22 23 24 98. Beginning in August of 2014 shortly after the death of Michael Brown, Plaintiffs began investigating matters relating to the death of Brown, and also the subsequent riots. 25 26 27 28 1 marked place A hyperlink is “an electronic link providing direct access from one distinctively document.” http://www.merriamin a a different hypertext or hypermedia document to another in the same or Webster.com/dictionary/hyperlink last accessed June 17, 2015. 21 99. The Brown death and the Ferguson Riots were among the market for top media stories in the St. Louis, Missouri media UJN 2014. 100. The riots destroyed large swaths of Ferguson, occasions Missouri, nearly overran police positions on multiple and resulted in multiple US Department of Justice investigations, public official firings, and additional riots Okoooqmmp Governor throughout the St. Louis region, such that the Missouri was forced to dispatch more than 2,000 National Guardsmen. Louis 101. Johnson personally traveled throughout the St. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 region to report on events and also sources within local law enforcement and in various places regionally, who assisted him in his reporting. provided 102. Local and national law enforcement sources Michael Johnson with credible information which suggested that Brown, as a juvenile, was implicated in a murder. invested tens 103. As a result of these leads, Johnson has 20 Missouri courts to of thousands of dollars in trying to convince 21 unlock Michael Brown’s juvenile records. 22 23 24 25 filed 104. In pursuit of this objective, Johnson has multiple lawsuits in multiple Missouri Circuit Courts. court of 105. Upon ultimately being denied by the juvenile 26 temporarily St. Louis County in mid—September 2014, Johnson 27 halted his pursuit. 28 22 as 106. Upon discovering that the records were not reviewed part of the grand jury evidence, Plaintiffs resumed the legal battle for the records by appealing the denial to the Missourilate Court of Appeals for the Eastern District of Missouri in November, 2014. was 107. On or about December 4, 2014, a preliminary writ ooqoxmpH granted by the Court of Appeals, but the writ was ultimately permanently denied on December 18, 2014. 108. in May of 2015, Johnson appealed the records denial to 11 the Missouri Supreme Court, which ultimately denied him the 12 records. 109. As a result of his reporting, and his exposure of 13 14 facts which did not fit the common and hackneyed narrative 15 pushed by Gawker1 and other media entities external to St. Louis, Missouri, Plaintiffs became a very popular news and opinion 16 17 18 19 website for readers in the St. Louis Region, which is shown by data tracking Plaintiff GotNews' website's traffic. 110. Plaintiffs’ reputation amongst St. Louisans became 20 21 22 23 24 very positive and Plaintiffs’ brand, goodwill, and website traffic, all surged, as evidenced by a sudden increase in Plaintiffs’ web traffic. 25 26 27 28 Officer Darren Wilson’s money. The For example, one Gawker editor has encouraged hackers to steal former “Gawker Blogger Calls for Hackers Johnson, Charles general implication being that Wilson is a racist murderer. See (http://gotnews.com/gawker—blogger—calls-hackers— 2014 to Steal Darren Wilson’s Money,” Gotnews, September 9, steal-officer—darrenwilsons—money/ last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 1 23 111. Between September of 2014 and February of 2015, Got News enjoyed an online readership of nearly 83,000 people in Missouri, including at least 37,441 in the St. Louis Region. 112. Gawker staff first began to track the career of (DQONU'IiD-UJNH Plaintiff Charles Johnson during the summer of 2014.1 113. Johnson is generally of a different ideological persuasion then the Defendants.2 ‘114. On December 4, 2014, Defendant Greg Howard published 10 an article entitled, "Charles Barkley Has Nothing to Say to ll America. "3 115. In his article, Howard stated: 12 l3 This conversation is over; there is not debate to be had about the killing 14 of Eric Garner, and there really isn‘t one to be had on the degradation, 15 imprisonment, and systemic murder of minorities. It is a system of control, a machine, doing the work it was designed to do. Those who l6 17 blame its workings on its victims, invoking black pathologies and enumerating all the ways in which black people need to become better 18 and more moral to earn the without their killers even facing any consequences, are engaging in an old, tired respectability politics. They don‘t know what the fuck they’re 19 20 tafldngabout 21 ChaflesBandeydoesnotknowrwhatthefudrheetaudngabout 22 116. In the "discussion" section beneath his article, 23 24 right to complain about being killed Howard engaged in an extensive dialogue with an independent 25 26 27 28 Weinstein, “1s Ratfucking Journalism Dead?" Gawker, July ratfucking—journalism-dead-l601527887 last accessed Oct. 10, 2015). 1 2 3 See, e.g., Adam rd. §e_e Greg Howard, December 4, 2014, entitled “Charles Barkley 8, 2014 (http://gawkercoin/is— Has Nothing To Say To America,” published by deadspin.com on available online at http://deadspin.com/charles—barkley-has-nothing—to-say—to—america- 1666864783. 24 content creator and ultimately stated the following, demonstrating his position on the death of Michael Brown and those who believed Brown was not totally innocent: ~ jfificfifii; Gregiiznes§e 2333.524 $32578“: "5’:1 One for you: hag::fimwep‘osmgfwgbhfpegesfiro... 2/‘4 fieoiy .a’?“ fm‘efl; «on Greg Howard \ ‘Tégifgofigi 'flfifihéhfifim Nah, I mean this very seriously. wrong, 12 too. I think 2 "Km.ef if Angela Davis was wrong. This 13 this. If you you find someone who thinks there are, they are don‘t care if they're black or white. WEB. DuBois was wrong. there are, you are wrong. 11 There aren‘t two sides to isn't a debate. The: said, you have a great day. seems 14 See Ex. 40, Amended COmplaint for the entire exchange. 15 117. On December 5, 2014, one day after Defendant Greg 16 17 Howard published his the article described immediately above, 18 Plaintiffs published an article on the Gotnews website entitled, 19 "BREAKING: GotNews Wins First Stage of Appeal on Michael Brown 20 21 22 Records, #Ferguson.”1 118. In retaliation, on December 9, 2014, Defendants Howard 23 and Trotter published three defamatory articles designed to 24 malign and humiliate Plaintiffs. 25 26 27 28 1 Gotnews, December 5, 2014 (http://gotnews.com/breaking—gotnews—wins—first— stage—appeal—michaelbrown—records—ferguson—ericgarner/ last accessed, Oct. 2015). 25 9, 119. On or about the morning of December 9, 2014, Defendant Trotter composed, published, and initiated, a stand—alone writing entitled, "What Is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web’s Worst Journalist, Explained,” (referred to hereafter as "Trotter First”).1 120. In the article, Trotter maliciously characterizes Johnson as a racist, as well as using malicious paraphrasing to suggest that Johnson is a racist. a 121. In Trotter First, Defendant Trotter defamed, cast in false light, and injured Plaintiffs by proceeding to attempt to show how Plaintiff Johnson was the "web’s worst journalist," by juxtaposing Plaintiff Johnson’s journalistic professionalism alongside screenshots (provided with no accompanying context) of defamatory, false, and injurious Twitter postings ("tweets") made by various persons, each of which openly requested that on Twitter, Inc. staff permanently ban Plaintiffs from posting twitter.com, and which defamed Plaintiffs by alleging, inter and alia, that Plaintiffs were "stalking," "[h]arass[ing]," otherwise “endanger[ing]," other individuals. in a 122. In Trotter First, Defendant Trotter defamed, cast drew false light, and injured Plaintiffs by stating that Johnson attention to himself as a result of his flawed reporting in the Senate Republican Primary race in Mississippi. ("he’s drawn attention for his (flawed) reporting in the Senate Republican l http://gawker.com/what—is-chuck—johnson—and—why-the—web-s—worst—journal-1666834902 2015. ' 26 last accessed, June 17, primary race in Mississippi"). As a further proof of the allegation of "flawed" reporting, Trotter linked to another news article, which itself drew no conclusion and offered no proof of error in Johnson’s reporting in the Senate Republican Primary race in Mississippi. ooucnmhww 123. In Trotter First, Defendant Trotter defamed, cast in a false light, and injured Plaintiffs by paraphrasing a quote by Johnson, misleadingly stating that Johnson really meant that the 10 deceased Michael Brown, Jr., who was killed by Ferguson, 11 Missouri police officer Darren Wilson, “deserved to die" because 12 he was African'American.1 Trotter would go on to call this 13 "racist." 14 15 16 17 18 124. Importantly, Trotter is attacking Johnson’s ability as a journalist, directly accusing him of falsely reporting in an article that senate candidate (for New Jersey) Cory Booker didn’t actually reside in New Jersey at the time of his 19 candidacy (thereby rendering him ineligible, if true). Trotter 20 cites to another article2 as evidence that Booker did in fact 21 live in New Jersey, and thus proof that Johnson falsely 22 23 24 25 reported. 125. however, the article Trotter cites to is itself inconclusive on the matter. 26 27 28 ‘ 2 See Exhibit 16. Ruby Cramer, “Cory Booker: Yes, I Live In Newark,” Buzz Feed News, Oct. 14, (http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/cory—booker—yes-i-live—in-newark#.lmZ1 2015). 27 2013 15Wm1 last accessed Oct. 9, 126. In Trotter First, Defendant Trotter defamed, cast in a false light, and injured Dlaintiffs by stating that Johnson is, "well—known for publishing stories that fall apart under the slightest scrutiny. The list of Johnson stories that have been proVen wrong is long, but his greatest hits include: [e]rroneously reporting that former Newark Mayor Cory Booker didn't actually reside in Newarkl." Contributing reporting to the OOCOQONUTIDUJN Daily Caller’s infamous story about New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez allegedly soliciting prostitutes in the Dominican Republic. The Story turned out to be a complete fabrication,2 and may have even been planted by the Cuban government.” 127. Johnson’s article was not a lie, not a fabrication, and in fact the Senator has been indicted (March 6, 2015) by the Department of Justice on 14 counts, including corruption charges.3 128. The Department of Justice reports that the allegations NNNNNNNNNHl—IHHHr—Il—IHI—ai—a of sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic has mummwr—Iowooximmpl—n been corroborated.4 itself drew no conclusions and Defendant Trotter offered as proof, a link to a “Buzz Feed News” article which Booker: Yes, I Live in “Cory Cramer, simply reported the perspectives of competing viewpoints. See Ruby http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/corv-booker—ves-i-live-inNewark,” Buzz Feed News, October 14, 2013, ngwarkiidymdQQX last accessed June 17, 2015. article which simply reported on the 2 Here again, as supposed proof, Trotter inserted a link to an ABC News online conclusions one way or another. See Rhonda controversy surrounding Senator Menendez and proffered no ‘Scandal’: How It Happened.” ABC News, Schwartz, Brian Ross and Ned Berkowitz, “The Menendez Prostitution 1 ‘ 2013, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/robert-menendez—prostitution-scandal—happened/story?id=18664472 last accessed June 17, 2015. Backed By ‘Corroborating 3 Chuck Ross, “DOJ: Underage Prostitution Allegations Against Robert Menendez March 6, Evidence,” The Daily Caller, August, 24, 2015 (http://dai1ycaller.com/2015/08/24/doj—underage—prostitution— allegations—against—robert—menendez—backed—by—corroborating—evidence/ last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 4M. 28 — that 129. Trotter cites as proof that Johnson fabricated an article by ABC is, completely invented — the Menendez story, News,1 which does not reach a conclusion and at best for Trotter, merely expresses doubt about Johnson’s allegations in his (I)\IO‘\U1.I>LIJN article. 130. Trotter, on the other hand, reports that conclusively, Johnson lied and made up the entire article. 131. Trotter cited 39 other sources to support his 10 statement that Johnson had fabricated the story about Senator 11 Menendez. 12 132. In Trotter First, a number of anonymous, non— 13 initiating content creators defamed, falsely portrayed, and 14 injured Plaintiffs. 15 16 17 133. Shortly after the initial section of Trotter First was published on gawker.com, several of such anonymous content 19 creators published defamatory content on Trotter First. 134. One such anonymous content creator, "Cmcalumna," 20 claimed to have attended college with Johnson. 18 135. Though she is anonymous, she suggests she has special 21 22 23 24 25 knowledge of Johnson: "Hilariously, he graduated being best known for pooping on the (I think I’m remembering the floor right) 7th floor of Stark (a dorm)." 26 27 28 V‘Scandal’: How It Happened,” Rhonda Schwartz, Brian Ross and Ned Berkowitz, “The Menendez Prostitution (http://abcnews.go.com/Bletter/robert-menendez—prostitution-scandalABC News Online, March 6, 2013 l happened/story?id=18664472 last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 29 a 136. She then let slip her motivation for releasing such tidbit of information: "I’m sad this idiot is getting any attention at all, but I hope this guy becomes famous for the problems." same reasons he was in college, his public pooping on 137. Cmcalumna published false information about Johnson mummbww Trotter First, cast him in a false light, and injured Johnson by stating as a matter of fact that Johnson publicly defecated in either the hallway or elevator of his dormitory in college. 10 138. Defendant Trotter incited and solicited additional ll false, injurious and defamatory comments from Cmcalumna as well 12 as other content creators on Trotter First. 139. Then another unpaid—content—creator asked Cmcalumna to replied, at 1:052m on. 13 14 15 16 17 18 "elaborate on the poop story," Cmcalumna December 9, 2014,1 that since she started at college two years after Johnson, she didn't actually have any basis of knowing whether or not Johnson had publicly defecated. Rather, she 19 but simply described upper—classmen talking about it "regularly" 20 it."2 yet that it was an "undisputed fact that he did 140. At 1:44 p.m. on December 9, 2014,3 anonymous unpaid— 21 22 23 24 25 26 content—creator "CCJ Facebook Friend” published a discussion directed at J.K. Trotter, in which he claims to faithfully reproduce, from Johnson’s Private, invite—only Facebook account Johnson’s page, a letter written by Johnson and posted on 27 28 1 2 3 See Plaintiff‘s Ex. 18. Id. Id. 30 on Facebook wall for dissemination to former classmates of his I Facebook. "This is from his Facebook account late last night. don’t know how to screenshot the whole thing,"1 Friend is 141. Notably, the letter posted by CCJ Facebook hours exactly the same as the one Greg Howard would publish two OO\IO\U1J>LUNl-‘ later in his post on Deadspin. Facebook 142. Greg Howard did not have access to Johnson’s page, because they were not Facebook friends. 10 CCJ 143. On December 10, 2014,2 Trotter would respond to 12 Facebook Friend, seeking additional leads, information, collaboration: "Are there any other comments on that Facebook 13 post?" 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 I Trotter to write an article about the defamatory matters that discussed by Cmcalumna, but Trotter informed the individual Defendant Howard had already written, and initiated/published, stand—alone or about the afternoon of December 9, 2014, a on Blogger writing on deadspin.com, entitled, "Wait, Did Clowntroll "Howard Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One Time?" (hereafter, First”).3 23 24 25 _144. Some anonymous content creators begged Defendant creator 145. At 4:19 p.m. on December 9, 2014,4 content "IkerCatsillas" posts a discussion piece (directed at Trotter) 26 27 28 1 2 3 Id kt . http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/wait—did-clowntroll-blogger—chuck-johnson-shit—on—the—1668919746 accessed, June 17,2015. 4 Id. 31 last scoop this on the First Trotter article: "Please J.K. You gotta poop story for us. For journalism. I need to know more." At 4:4; it." The phrase "on 243.,1 Trotter responds: "[Deadspin] is on it” is hyperlinked and links to Greg Howard’s “clowntroll” 0‘01»m article. posted 146. On December 9, 2014 (at 4:20 p.m.), Trotter \] Chuck another article entitled, "The Daily Caller Can’t Quit Johnson."2 Johnson 147. In the article, Trotter repeatedly states that 11 wrote false stories. cast in 148. In Trotter Second, Defendant Trotter defamed, 12 13 that Johnson a false light, and injured Plaintiffs reporting 14 contributed to a false story about New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez supposedly soliciting prostitutes in the Dominican 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Republic."3 2014, 149. Between 2:00 p.m. and 2:14 p.m. on December 9, questions:4 Greg Howard emailed Charles Johnson and asked various for "Chuck, we just got a tip that you wrote up a Facebook post happened your past classmates. Just checking to see it actually of the and is accurate. [The email goes on to quote a portion letter posted by CCJ Facebook Friend to the First Trotter 25 26 27 28 1 2 Id. fig 4 December “The Daily Caller Can’t Quit Chuck Johnson,” published by gawker.com on http://gawker.com/the—dai1y-caller-can—t-quit—chuck-johnson—1668910086. 2014, available online at 9, 3 J .K. Trotter, entitled Id. See 11am Plaintiffs Ex. 39. (2 p.m. Eastern Note that time appears as l 1am because Time). 32 it was received by Charles Johnson in California at article initiated/instigated at 11:25 am.] This is your writing, WNH correct? Thanks, Greg."1 150. At 2:06 p.m. on December 9, 2014,2 Johnson responded: “Run it in its entirety. Don’t do me like you did Cory Gardner, though." 151. At 2:14 pm. on December 9, 2014,3 Johnson emailed OkomflmU'Iwb on the Howard, stating, "Oh, and the comments about me shitting post floor were made up," — referencing the Cmcalumna discussion earlier at 12:30 pm and 1:05p.m. on the Trotter article. 152. At 2:20 p.m. on December 9, 2014,“.Howard again emailed Johnson: "If you have time, we got a tip that you had a 2002 bestiality charge expunged from your record because you were a minor at the time. Is this true?" 153. Prior to Defendant Howard publishing Howard First, Plaintiff Johnson emailed Defendant Howard and categorically denied that incident that was the basis for the article’s title NMNNNNNNNF—‘I—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘l—‘HI—‘I—‘l—l ever occurred. "instigated" his 154. At 4:00 p.m., Greg Howard initiated/ mummhwmwowmqmmpI—I On The piece, “Wait, Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit Floor One Time?"5 155. The article includes references to anonymous rumors that Johnson publicly defecated in college: "there are cryptic 5 http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/wait—did—clowntroll-blogger-chuck-johnson-shit-on-the—1 668919746 last accessed Oct. 9, 2015). 33 comments from friends and former classmates about some to mysterious floor—shitting incident." Howard then proceeded additional solicit additional tips, photos, and context from Kinja content—creators. mummpI-A content 156. In Howard First, Defendant Howard also created amongst other non—initiating content—creators, soliciting information from them as well as adopting and advertising 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 First defamatory content published by Cmcalumna on the Trotter View website, encouraging other readers and content creators to the defamatory statements by hyperlinking to Cmcalumna’s published Content. ("I’ll tell you what. There is some good—ass at kinja to be had re: Chuck shitting on the floor one time over Gawker [hyperlink inserted into the text]"). social—media, 157. ("Kinja” refers to Gawker’s proprietary 18 media content aggregating tool that readers, content creators various and others use to collect and View content created on 19 Gawker media property websites. 17 20 158. The phrase "good—ass kinja" refers to high quality 21 content that readers, content creators, and others would be 22 advised to view. 23 24 25 26 "good—ass kinja," 159. Stating that particular content is content, serves as Well as instantly providing the link to said Defendant as express endorsement of the linked content, and 27 View Howard intended to direct as many readers as possible to 28 the defamatory content. 34 160. By adopting, endorsing, advertising, responding to, interacting with, and directing additional content—creators, and readers, and others to such defamatory, false, misleading, injurious content created by a non—initiating content creator, Defendants Howard and Gawker formally adopted and are liable and all of Cmcalumna’s content published on Trotter First mummfi-wm for, Howard First. 161. Instead of basing his reporting of the public ll defecation on discussion posts on Trotter’s article, Howard misrepresents that he saw such allegations on Johnson’s Facebook 12 page. "Sure enough, on the Facebook post, there are cryptic 13 comments from friends and former classmates about some 14 mysterious floor—shitting incident."1 10 15 16 17 18 19 to 162. However, as mentioned, Howard doesn’t have access on this page. And in any event there were no comments made Johnson’s Facebook page during this time that referenced or alleged public defecation.2 20 163. Howard lied about his source. 21 164. To give the accusations greater weight, Howard 22 23 24 25 reported that he saw them on Johnson's Facebook wall. defaming 165. Howard closed out his article by smearing and Johnson further: "m[H]e’s been caught lying many times before..."3 26 27 28 1 See Plaintiff’s Ex. 14. the floor defecating These screenshots evidence that Howard lied about where he saw page. Facebook Johnson’s on comments, as there were no floor defecation comments 3 See Plaintiff’s Ex. 14. 2 See Plaintiffs" Ex. 37. 35 166. Howard provides no evidence of Johnson having ever lied, nor does he provide any evidence that Johnson was ever caught lying. 167. At 4:34 p.m. on December 9, 2014,1 Gawker writer Jordan GDQONU'IIh-UJNH Sargent posts a discussion post directed at Greg Howard on the "clowntroll" article, stating, "This guy shitting on the flooris a very apt metaphor for why he’s in the news now." 168. At 5:09 p.m. on December 9, 2014,2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) wrote a discussion post on the First Trotter article, and directed at Cmcalumna: "I have heart breaking news, team, there was never any proof that he actually was the one who pooped on the floor. Someone did poop on the floor and just to sort of troll the Mountain King himself, people started posting that he pooped. It was one of those things no one could proof or disprove m but alas it’s not *really* true." 169. At 10:26 p.m. on December 9, 2014,3 Cmcalumna wrote a 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - discussion post on Howard’s Deadspin "clowntroll" article, replying to Greg Howard’s previous discussion post ("mThere is some good—ass kinja to be had re: chuck shitting on the floor no one time over at Gawker") in which she clarifies that she has "I think you proof of the defecation incident having occurred: made my year by writing an entire article based on my comment. l 2 Id. Id. gawker.com on December Can’t Quit Chuck Johnson,” published by §e_e J .K. Trottera entitled “The Daily Caller 2014, available online at http://gawker.com/the-daily—caller-can—t-quit—chuck—johnson-l668910086. 3 36 9, I’d give anything to have some proof, but occurred m I I wasn’t there when it am so glad when someone googles his name this will hope him pooping in stark [dorm] follows him forever, just goes to show you how important it is to use a bathroom (and appear. I not be an asshole your entire life)." (emphasis added). \DQNGU'IIbbJNl-I 170. Cmcalumna had no proof, therefore, that Johnson publicly defecated, but yet she was extremely pleased that Howard wrote his article based upon her comment. 171. Later in the day on or about December 9, 2014, after Defendant fioward had published content directing viewers to Cmcalumna’s defamatory, false, and injurious content, Cmcalumna published additional content as a direct response to Defendant Howard’s publication (i.e., "There is some good—ass kinja to be hadm”). 172. On December 9, 2014, sometime shortly after Cmcalumna NNNNNNNNNHI—‘i—‘I—‘I—‘l—‘HI—‘I—‘I—J initiated the rumor about public defecation, the first "tweet" mummtHommqmwtr—Io was published on Twitter. See Plaintiffs Ex. 8. 173. Also on December 9, 2014, sometime after instigating "We need his article, Howard himself tweeted on Twitter:1 answers: Wait, Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One Time?” He then posted a link to the article he instigated. 1 See Plaintiffs’ Ex. 29. 37 174. Defendant Howard would have been uniquely and N particularly made aware of Cmcalumna's publication on the writing Howard had initiated. 175. Plaintiff Johnson repeatedly requested that Defendant Howard publically retract his defamatory statements, but Defendant Johnson refused. 176. When Cmcalumna ultimately posted a discussion post 0000qt reply directly to Howard, informing him in no uncertain terms that she had absolutely no basis of knowledge as to whether or 11 not Johnson publicly defecated, Howard still refused to print a 12 retraction. 177. On December 12, 2014, at 12:42 p.m.,1 Trotter emailed 13 14 15 16 17 I’m Charles Johnson: "Hi Charles, I’m a reporter at Gawker, and writing because we’ve received a pair of allegations involving them.2 The you, and wanted to give you an opportunity to address 19 second allegation is that, in 2002, you were photographed sexually assaulting a sheep behind a family member’s ranch in 20 San Bernardino County, near Wrightwood; that you were arrested 18 21 22 23 24 25 26 convicted of by the San Bernardino County Sheriff and later to have this; and that, in 2007, you successfully petitioned irecords of the incident expunged. Is this allegation true? The sources for both claims supplied detailed accounts of each of have the incidents described above. Please let me know if you 27 28 I The first rumor Trotter Plaintiffs’ 2 discusses Ex. 38 for the fill text. is not part of this suit and Id. ki 38 is therefore omitted from the excerpt. Please see information to any other questions, or if you need any other address these allegations. My working deadline is midnight EST, require more but that is flexible, so please let me know if you time." I honestly 178. Johnson responded:1 "Neither story is true. have no idea where these crazy stories come from." would 179. On December 12, 2014, at 4:08 p.m.,2 Trotter oxoooqcnmhwm who follow up with Johnson: "The first story comes from a person witnessed the says they were physically present, and personally conversation. We’ve verified that this person attended Claremont with you. This person provided a very specific account of the incident. The second story comes a person [sic] who is friends with an officer in the San Bernardino County Sheriff, who is the familiar with the details of the alleged assault. Apparently incident has become fairly well—known within that county’s law enforcement circles. Again, I just wanted to get your input NNNNNNNNNI—Il—II—Il—II—II—Il—Ip—IHH before putting anything up. I’m fairly sure you understand ooqoxmhwwwomooqmmawmh- that.” 180. On or about December 15, 2014, Trotter wrote, published, and initiated a writing entitled, "Which of These "Trotter Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors are True?" (hereafter, Third”) 1 2 3 . 3 Id. hi http://gawker.com/which-of-these—disgusting-chuck—johnson—rumors—are—true—1669433099 2015. 39 last accessed June 17, 181. Also on December 15, 2014,1 Greg Howard published on his Twitter social media account a hyperlink to Trotter’s instigated article ("Which of These Disgusting Rumorsm") and stating: "Torn. (DQONUln-bUON I kinda feel like sheepfucking is something you grow into. On the other hand, [Charles Johnson] is a prodigy." 182. In Trotter Third, Defendant Trotter presented disgusting rumors which were not items of public concern prior to Defendants collective creation, collaboration, publication 10 and incitation. 11 183. In Trotter Third, in which Defendant Trotter describes 12 the initiated writing as a "RUMORMONGER[ING]”2 published writing, 13 14 15 16 17 Trotter defamed, misleadingly and falsely portrayed, and injured Plaintiff Johnson by heavily quoting from Cmcalumna’s false and defamatory content published in Trotter First, wherein Cmcalumna stated that she knew from either personal knowledge or from 18 other certain, undisclosed evidence, that Johnson defecated in 19 public. 20 184. Specifically, Trotter stated, “there is no evidence of 21 Chuck Johnson took a shit on the floor in college. Chuck Johnson was, however, so thoroughly disliked in college that his 22 23 24 classmates chose to blame an unattributed shit on him.” 25 185. Trotter also stated, "There is no evidence that Chuck 26 Johnson was arrested in 2002 for pinning a sheep to a fence and 27 28 ‘ 2 See Plaintiffs’ Ex. 1. Rumermonger: a person who spreads rumors. http://www.merriam—webster.com/dictionary/rumormonger accessed June 17,2015. 40 last whom fucking it. Johnson is, however, the kind of guy about random people make up and circulate rumors about him being it.” arrested in 2002 for pinning a sheep to a fence and fucking the fourth 186. However, similar to Lawson’s conclusions in ooqnpwwr—I "gay rapist” James Franco article, Trotter suggests the bestiality and public defecation rumors might be true, because "A search through it cannot be confirmed or denied, but stated, turn public records and the archives of local newspapers did not 11 any mention of an arrest matching the one our source described. (This does not necessarily mean that the arrest 12 didn’t occur, though; editors don’t necessarily publish all 1o '13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,up incidents involving the police, and public records databases would not contain an expunged record.)" 187. After instrumentally generating minor interest at least as to the rumor of public defecation, Defendant Trotter concocted a false, misleading, pseudo—journalistic device to reporting. make it appear to a casual Viewer that he was merely read on a pre-existing matter of public concern. ("You may have The New York Times! profile of Charles C. Johnson, the worst journalist on the internet. You also may have seen several very 25 elaborate, very unbelievable, and very gross rumors about Johnson’s past misdeeds floating around Twitter and Facebook. So 26 maybe you’re wondering: Which of those rumors are real?"). 24 27 28 41 188. In Trotter Third, Defendant Trotter reported that Defendant Howard had previously written about allegations of public defecation as against Johnson. 189. Discussing a rumor ("Rumor 1: Johnson shit on the mummpi—l floor in college"), Defendant Trotter then reported that two of Johnson’s college classmates, writing anonymously on Gawker,1 had stated as a matter of fact that Johnson had defecated publicly at college. Trotter then purported to quote from, and 10 hyperlinked to, various publications on Trotter First by two 11 anonymous, non—initiating content—creators: Cmcalumna and 12 ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!). 190. However, Defendant Trotter acknowledged that 13 14 15 16 17 18 ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) did not make such a statement about public defecation actually occurring. Rather, ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) stated that while some person did in fact defecate in the dormitory, several years ago, it was not 19 Johnson, and that any attribution to Johnson was out of extreme 20 spite. 191. Thus, as evidenced by the writing in Trotter Third, 21 22 23 24 25 26 Defendant Trotter’s only basis upon which to base his reporting were the publications of a single, anonymous content creator (Cmcalumna), made on an article Trotter himself had initiated and published. 27 28 them as being classmates of Johnson, but does not describe the basis of his knowledge that they used “burner” Gawker content creator were, in fact, classmates of Johnson. Trotter also describes them as having content-creator account. profiles. A “burner” profile is slang for an anonymously created non—initiating 1 Trotter describes 42 192. The manner in which Defendant Trotter wrote the initiating portion of the writing was designed to give the audience the impression that Defendants Trotter and Howard were privy to special and hidden information, and this created an atmosphere in_which the rumors could be perceived as being more OmNQWDbWNl—l true than false, even though Trotter and Howard had serious reason to believe they were false. 193. For example, in Trotter Third, Defendant Trotter also failed to report that Cmcalumna had, subsequent to stating that it was "an undisputed fact" that Johnson had publicly defecated, recanted that statement and other similar statements, directly to Greg Howard. 194. Further, Trotter failed to mention that Cmcalumna had expressed extreme hatred of Johnson and had deliberately defamed him. 195. In Trotter Third, Trotter deliberately misattributed mflmLflfi-WNI—IOKDGJQONUII-bWNI—‘O NNNNNNNNNHI—IHI—IHHHHHH and omitted facts in order to mislead readers into believing there was a factual basis to the allegation that Johnson had publicly defecated. 196. Thus, any reader would be left with the impression that Johnson may have defecated publicly, even though Defendant case.\ Trotter himself had reason to know that this was not the 197. In Trotter Third, Defendant Trotter also reported upon lltip" the investigation he and Greg Howard had conducted into a that Johnson had " ucked a sheep.” 43 198. Defendant Trotter wrote that his source had told him that "Chuck had a 2002 bestiality charge expunged from his record due to his being a minor, 14 at the time." 199. Similar to the previous rumor, Defendant Trotter did (DQQUIIPUJNH not divulge any information about his source and the basis of knowledge; 200. Defendant Trotter continues on to describe his attempt to verify the allegations made in the "tip," and also describes an additional tipster who called Defendant Howard on the ll telephone and relayed a graphic allegation of Johnson having sex 12 with a sheep, and Trotter recounts the allegation at length with 13 enough detail to seemingly lend credence to the allegation. 14 ("[Johnsonj was spotted attempting to copulate with his wool 15 sheep. The neighbor took pics with a telephoto lens, which, 16 17 18 since the cops didn't catch him mid-act, were used as the basis for his conviction. He was pants—down, pinning the sheep against 19 the fence W [Johnson] got it expunged in 2007 saying he was just 20 a kid experimenting”). 21 22 23 24 25 26 201. Defendant Trotter also recounted that he and Defendant Howard had contacted the San Bernardino County district attorney's office seeking Johnson’s juvenile records related to the alleged charge of bestiality, and that a representative at the juvenile division there said that the office could not 27 divulge information pertaining to individuals arrested and 28 charged as juveniles, "as Johnson allegedly was.” 44 202. Important to note, Plaintiffs have come under intense, hateful criticism for having sought the juvenile records of Michael Brown, Jr. 203. Trotter Third is simply a play—by—play account of reporting on largely self—created or incited rumors on matters \OCDQO‘U'IvbWNI-l which at no point were a matter of public concern. 204. The Trotter Third content described above is false, misleading, injurious, and intrinsically malicious and defamatory. 205. Upon publication of the initiating segment of Trotter Third, Defendant Howard published a statement using his Twitter account (@greghoward88) to advertise, endorse, and direct viewer traffic to Trotter Third. ("torn. i kinda feel like sheepfucking is is something you grow into. on the other hand, @chuckcjohnson a prodigy. [link to Trotter Second as well as screenshot of the article]” NNNNNNNNNi—‘I—ll—‘I-‘i-‘l-‘I—‘HHH mummth-oxoooxlmmawmpo 206. Trotter, Howard, and other Gawker paid content creatOrs communicated in the discussion/comments section of Gawker articles and actively sought additional defamatory statements to be published. 207. Gawker has a history of soliciting defamatory comments from unpaid content creators and then using such defamatory content as an excuse to publish "news" articles discussing the merits of the incited rumors. 45 208. Gawker specifically attempts to utilize the nature of the initiator of the defamatory content (i.e., the anOnymous unpaid content creator publishing on Gawker’s articles) and illusory non—agency of the same as a tool to attempt to circumvent liability for the defamatory comments. \DOO\lO\U1ul>wNH their 209. A significant number of Gawker's readers visit sites primarily to read the discussion/comments sections. 210. Defendant Howard’s @greghoward88 Twitter account reaches nearly thirteen thousand (13,000) individual followers nationally, including numerous followers throughout Missouri. 211. Defendant Gawker’s @gawker Twitter account is followed by and reaches in excess of five hundred and thirty—eight thousand (538,000) individuals. 212. On December 9, 2015, @gawker published a "tweet" advertising Trotter Second. NMNNNNNNNHI—‘I—‘l—‘l—‘Hi—‘l—‘I—‘I—I "tweet" 213. On December 15, 2015, @gawker published a oouowmtI—Iomooxlmmfi-wNI—Io advertising Trotter One. 214. Defendant Mr. Howard has a long history of defaming people whom he simply does not like or disagrees with. 215. Jason Whitlock is a competing sports writer (Mr. Howard writes primarily for Deadspin.com a sports blog). 216. Mr. Howard and other deadspin writers have set out to destroy Mr. Whitlock's reputation in a very similar way to their attacks one. Johnson. 46 217. They have fabricated stories about him and mischaracterized his statements. 218. Mr. Whitlock is claiming that Howard has made up stories about him and encouraged Deadspin writers to use the OO\IO\U1J>UON word "nigger" twice, in stories about him.1 219. It is apparent that Mr. Howard is trying to create the same sort of mischaracterized racial animus that he attributed to Mr. Johnson by mischaracterizing him and his ideas.2 10 220. Mr. Howard and Gawker have a long and continuing 11 history of creating offensiye libelous material about those who 12 disagree with them. 13 221. Howard, Trotter, Gawker, and independent content 14 creators Cmcalumna, ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) conspired together 15 16 17 through Gawkers’ "Securedrop" and “burner accounts” systems to deny Plaintiffs’ their property right to lawsuits for defamation 18 against the anonymous content creators under the 14th Amendment 19 to the United States Constitution. 20 222. Howard, Trotter, Gawker, and independent content 21 creators Cmcalumna, ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) conspired together 22 to defame Plaintiffs. 23 24 25 26 27 28 223. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference, as if fully stated herein, Exhibit 42, consisting of statements A—AJ, for Counts I—IV against Gawker, Howard, and Trotter. & Responds With Pure Fire,” Jake O’Donnell, entitled “Jason Whitlock Goes All-In on Deadspin, Greg Howard http://www.sportsgrid.com/uncategorized/jasonat available published by sportsgrid.com on October 15, 2015, whitlock-goes-all-in—in—fued-with-deadspin-greg-howard—responds/ 1 2 Id 47 224. Each of statements A—AJ in Exhibit 42 are provably false, reasonably capable of being interpreted by the trier of fact as having a defamatory meaning, were published with malice, were published with knowledge that they were false or with \OmflO‘Lflfi-WNH reckless disregard for their veracity, were not opinions, were not published solely for the purpose of satire or humor, were not neutrally or fairly reported, were not matters of public concern, and were defamatory when taken in their literary contexts. 225. As to each of statements A—AJ, supra, Plaintiffs have been damaged in reputation and have suffered pecuniary damages of lost buSiness and lost investments due to damaged business reputation, as well as the need for Plaintiff to file this lawsuit to defend his good name and the related costs from attorney’s fees, in an amount exceeding $2,000,000. NNNNNNNNNHHI—‘i—‘I—‘i—‘I—‘HI—‘H mQONsWNHOKomxlONU'IvP-WNI—JO Counts and II: Defamation and Injurious Falsehood (Against Defendants Gawker and Trotter) I 226. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, all prior allegations of this Complaint. 227. This claim arose in St. Louis County, Missouri. 228. However, the claim is also cognizable in California and throughout the United States. 229. On or about December 9, 2014 and again on December 15, 2014, Defendants Trotter and Gawker composed and published three 48 H N w' internet news articles including statements about Plaintiff’s person and Plaintiff’s business. 230. Defendant J.K. Trotter was at fault in publishing the a articles described in paragraph 64 and knew that the statements m were libelous when published. m u m m Ho 231. The statements described in paragraph 229 (and 223— 225) were defamatory in that they asserted —through false statements— that Plaintiff Charles C. Johnson is an unskilled and incompetent journalist and also that during his college life HH he was involved in a number of unsavory incidents. Specifically, HN the statements included the following direct quotations: Hm Hp Hm Hm Hu Hm Hm a. From the December 9, 2014 article titled "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web’s Worst Journalist, Explained" i. "The list of Johnson stories that have been proven wrong is long, but his greatest hits include: 1. "Erroneously reporting that former No Newark mayor Cory Booker didn’t actually reside NH in Newark." NN Nm Np Nm Nm 2. l‘Contributing reporting to the Daily Caller’s infamous story about New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez allegedly soliciting prostitutes in the Dominican Republic. The story turned out to Nu be a complete fabrication, and may have been Nm planted by the Cuban government." 49 ii. Defendant Trotter states: “Earlier this year, [Johnson] collected screenshots of murdered teenager Michael Brown’s Instagram account. (Quoting Johnson,) ‘Brown’s Instagram account also shows a violent streak that may help explain what led to a KomflmU'lIh-UJNH violent confrontation with Police officer Darren Wilson,’ Johnson wrote. In other words, Brown deserved to die." (emphasis added). This statement contains the induced allegation of fact that Plaintiff asserted Michael Brown deserved to die. b. From-the December 15, 2014 article titled, "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors are True?" i. In bold, "Johnson shit on the floor in college.” ii. Defendant Trotter’s article then goes on to publish comments from Gawker readers who allege to be NNNNNNNNNI—‘HI—‘I—‘Hl—‘Hl—Il—‘H ooqoxmpb—tomooqmmwwI—Ao former classmates of Plaintiff: l. "Hilariously, he graduated being best- known for pooping on the (I think I’m remembering the floor right) 7th floor of Stark (a dorm). I’m sad this idiot is getting any attention at all, but I hope this guy becomes famous for the same reasons he was in college, his public pooping problems.” 50 2. I started two years after him, so I wasn’t there since he did it as a freshman or sophomore. But the upperclassman talked about it regularly and it was an undisputed fact that he did it. Multiple people talked about it in great koooqmmtI-I detail [confirmed by another commenter] on the school’s paper/website the cmcforum.com and I bet many instances of people talking about it can be o seen in the comment archives from 2008—2011. H iii. In bold, "Johnson fucked a sheep.” M iv. w posted to Gawker from individuals who claim to Defendant Trotter again published comments ‘ b know Plaintiff: m m 4 m 1. Chuck had a 2002 bestiality charge expunged from his record due to his being a minor, 14 at the time. 2. NNNNNNNNN'HHr—IHHI—IHHHH m A friend is in the San Bernardino o County Sheriff Dept. As I heard it, Chuck was H about 14, had gone to stay with his cousins [for] N m h m m a few weeks... He went for a weekend with one to a friend of the cousin’s who owned a ranch near Wrightwood. The father of the friend got suspicious when they u caught him coming back inside very late the first m night. The next night, he apparently wandered 51 , z"\ x ‘ ref ‘\ ’ I; A/ \ back out & got the cops called on him by a neighbor when he was spotted attempting to copulate with his wool sheep. The neighbor took pics with a telephoto lens, which, since the cops didn’t catch him mid—act, were used as the basis KOOJQQUIQWNH for his conviction. He was pants-down, pinning the sheep against the fence. The story is still famous in circles of San Bernardino County law enforcement, apparently. He got it expunged in 2007, saying he was just a kid experimenting, and he didn’t want it to reflect badly when he was in college working for collegiate newspapers. My friend won’t give interviews, because he’d get in trouble for leaking expunged records, but it definitely mqIrhWNI—IOKOCDQmLNsh-WNI—‘O NNNNNNNNNI—IHHI—II—IHHHr—IH happened, and word is that the files & pics still exist. Hope that helps!! 232. The above statements published by Defendant Trotter are statements of fact that are objectively falsifiable. 233. The above statements published by Defendant Trotter are patently false. 234. The statements described in 229— 233 (and 223—225) were published online and circulated around the entire United States. The statements were intentionally made available to and read by the general public in the state of Missouri. 52 235. By his online publication of the statements described in paragraphs 229— 233 (and 223—225) Defendant Trotter intentionally targeted the state of Missouri and knew or should have known that residents of the state of Missouri would read” GDQONU'Ith-UJNH the statements. 236. The statements tend to deprive plaintiff of the benefit of public confidence and social and business associations, and the defendant published the statements knowing 10 11 they were defamatory. 237. Pefendant Trotter intended to harm Plaintiff’s 12 interests by publishing the statements described in paragraphs‘ 13 229— 233 (and 223-225) or Defendant Trotter recognized or should 14 have recognized that such harm was likely. 15 16 17 18 238. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in paragraphs 229— 233 (and 223—225) has been damaged in reputation, Plaintiff’s business has been placed 19 in jeopardy, and Plaintiff has suffered emotional injury, all to 20 his damage in a sum to exceed $2,000,000. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 239. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in paragraphs 229— 233 (and 223—225), Plaintiffs Charles C. Johnson and Got News, LLC have been damaged in reputation and have suffered pecuniary damages of lost business and lost investments due to damaged business reputation, as well as the need for Plaintiff to file this 28 53 lawsuit to defend his good name and the related costs from attorney’s fees, in an amount exceeding $2,000,000. 240. Defendant Trotter’s conduct in publishing the statements described in paragraphs 229— 233 (and 223—225) was done with knowledge that the statements were false or with OkOGJNONU'IIbWNI—l reckless disregard for whether they were true or false at a time when defendant had serious doubt as to whether they were true, thereby warranting an award of punitive damages in a sum of not less than $20,000,000. 241. Defendant Trotter was an agent, servant, and employee of Defendant Gawker, and as at all such times acting within the scope and course of his agency and employment; and/or his actions were expressly authorized by Defendant Gawker; and/or his actions were ratified by Defendant Gawker, thus making Defendant Gawker liable for said actions under the doctrine of NMNNNNNNNI—‘I—‘I—‘i—‘l—‘I—‘l—‘i—‘I—ll—I respondeat superior. mummpI—IomooqmmtI—I WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants Trotter and Gawker on Counts I and II of this Complaint and for such damages as are fair and reasonable, together with interest and costs, and such other and further relief, as the court shall deem proper. Counts III and IV: Defamation and Injurious Falsehood (Against Defendants Gawker and Howard) 232. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, all prior allegations of this Complaint. 54 233. This claim arose in St. Louis County, Missouri. 234. However, the claim is also cognizable in California and throughout the United States. 235. On or about December 9, 2014, Defendant Howard OKOQQONU‘InD-UJNl-l composed and published an Internet news article including statements about Plaintiff’s person and Plaintiff’s business. 236. Defendant Greg Howard was at fault in publishing the articles described in paragraph 79 and knew that the statements H HH were libelous when published. 237. The statements described in paragraph 245 (and 223— HN 225) as defamatory in that it asserted —through false Hw statements— that Plaintiff Charles C. Johnson is an unskilled Hb and incompetent journalist and also that during his college life Hm he was invOlved in a number of unsavory incidents. Specifically, Hm Hu Hm the statements included the following direct quotations: a. From the December 9, 2014 article titled “Wait, Hm Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One No Time?" NH i. "[Johnson] gets things wrong a lot." NN ii. Defendant Howard states: "Sure enough, on Nw N9 Nm Nm the Facebook post, there are cryptic comments from friends and former classmates about some mysterious floor—shitting incident" In the Comments section, titled "Greg Howard’s Nu b. Nm Discussions," on the article's webpage, Defendant 55 H N Howard posts to himself, "Tell you what. There is some good—ass kinja to be had re: Chuck shitting on the floor one time over at Gawker." .w 9 i. In the above—mentioned comment posted by m Defendant Howard, the words "good—ass kinja” are m hyperlinked to a comment by Cmcalumna on a Gawker u article titled, "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The m w Web’s Worst Journalist, Explained." ii. Ho HH Cmcalumna’s comment, posted 12/09/14 at 1:05 DM, reads as follows: 1. HN I started two years after him, so I Hm wasn’t there since he did it as a freshman or Hp sophomore. But the upperclassman talked about it Hm regularly and it was an undisputed fact that he. Hm did it. Multiple people talked about it in great Hu detail [confirmed by another commenter] on the Hm Hm school's paper/website the cmcforum.com and I bet wo many instances of people talking about it can be- NH seen in the comment archives from 2008—2011. NN Nm Np Nm Nm Nu Nm 238. The above statements published by Defendant Howard are statements of fact that are objectively falsifiable.' 239. The above statements published by Defendant Howard are patently false. 240. The statements described in paragraphs 245—249 (and 223—225) were published online and circulated around the entire 56 United States. The statements were intentionally made available to and read by the general public in the state of Missouri. 241. By his publication of the statements described in paragraphs 245—249 (and 223—225) online, Defendant Howard intentionally targeted the state of Missouri and knew or should have known that residents of the state of Missouri would read \OmQGWDHWNI-J the statements. 242. She statements tend to deprive plaintiff of the Ho benefit of public confidence and social and business HH associations, and the defendant published the statements knowing HN they were defamatory. I Hm Hp Hm Hm Hu Hm 243. Defendant Howard intended to harm Plaintiff’s interests by publishing the statements described in paragraphs 245—249 (and 223—225), or Defendant Howard recognized or should have recognized that such harm was likely. 244. Defendant Howard was an agent, servant, and employee Hm of Defendant Gawker, and as at all such times acting within the No scope and course of his agency and employment; and/or his NH actions were expressly authorized by Defendant Gawker; and/or NN his actions were ratified by Defendant Gawker, thus making Nm Defendant Gawker liable for said actions under the doctrine of Np Nm Nm .N u Nm respondeat superior. 245. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in 245—249 (and 223—225) Plaintiff has been damaged in reputation, Plaintiff’s business has been placed in 57 all to jeopardy, and Plaintiff has suffered emotional injury, his damage in a sum to exceed $2,000,000. 246. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in paragraphs 245—249 (and 223—225) Plaintiffs Charles C. Johnson and Got News, LLC have been \OmflmmID-UJNH damaged in reputation and have suffered pecuniary damages of lost business and lost investments due to damaged business reputation, as well as the need for Plaintiff to file this lawsuit to defend his good name and the related costs from attorney’s fees, in an amount exceeding $2,000,000. 247. Defendant Howard’s conduct in publishing the statements described in paragraphs 245—249 (and 223—225) was done with knowledge that the statements were false or with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false at a time when defendant had serious doubt as to whether they were true, thereby warranting an award of punitive damages in a sum of not NNNNNNNNNl—ll—‘l—‘i—‘Hi—‘Hl—ll—Il—I mummwHowmqmmtH-o less than $20,000,000. WHEREPORE, plaintiff prays judgment against defendants in Count III and IV of his Complaint and for such damages as are fair and reasonable, together with interest and costs, and such other and further relief, as the court shall deem proper. Count V: Invasion of Privacy — False Light (Against All Defendants) 232. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, all prior allegations of this Complaint. 58 233. Defendants have given publicity to fictional matters not of public concern, and have falsely and publicly attributed these fictional and outrageous acts to Plaintiffs in an effort to harm Plaintiffs. 234. Defendants have twisted Plaintiff’s words and the \OmQONU'InbOONI-l context in which they were made to such an extraordinary degree as to given them a highly offensive meaning not originally present, all in an effort to harm Plaintiffs. 235. Defendants have presented Plaintiffs to the public in a false light, and either knew precisely that they were misrepresenting Plaintiffs to the public, or Defendants acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which Plaintiffs would be placed. 236. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in Counts I—IV, Plaintiff has been damaged in reputation, Plaintiff’s business has been placed in jeopardy, oouoxmwHooooqmmpwmr—ao NNNNNNNNNHHHHHHHHHH and Plaintiff has suffered emotional injury, all to his damage in a sum to exceed $2,000,000. 237. As a direct result of the publication of the statements described in Counts I—IV, Plaintiffs Charles C. Johnson and Got News, LLC have been damaged in reputation and have suffered pecuniary damages of lost business and lost business investments, due to damaged business reputation, as well as the need for Plaintiff to file this lawsuit to defend 59 in an his good name and the related costs from attorney's fees, amount exceeding $2,000,000. 238. Defendants’ conduct in publishing the statements mdluh-UJNH described in Counts I—IV was done with knowledge that the statements were false or with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false at a time when defendant had serious doubt as to whether they were true, thereby warranting an award of punitive damages in a sum of not less than $20,000,000. 10 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants on 11 andCount V of this Complaint and for such damages as are fair 12 reasonable, together with interest and costs, and such other and 13 further relief as the court shall deem proper. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COUNT VI—42 U.S.C. § 1983 — Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights Under the Fourteenth Amendment (AGAINST ALL.DEFENDANTS) 232. The allegations contained in all paragraphs above are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. 233. Decause of Defendants’ use of "securedrop" and "burner accounts,” Plaintiffs are unable to identify anonymous Content creators Cmcalumna and ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPOp!). 234. For the same reasons, Plaintiffs are unable to serve 26 the anonymous content creators with a lawsuit for defamation, 27 and are thus unable to exercise their right to bring defamation 28 claims against the independent content creators. 60 of depriving 235. Defendants have conspired for the purpose I the Plaintiffs their right to file a defamation lawsuit under Zinermon Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. v. mummpI—I Burch, 494 u.s. 113 (1990). Howard236. Specifically, Pefendants Gawker, Trotter, and conspired with anonymous content creators Cmcalumna and ChekhovsGum(ItsGonnaPop!) and others to defame Plaintiffs and 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 deprive them of their civil rights by inciting defamatory rumors, developing means to keep anonymous content creators identities a secret, by then hiding behind the anonymous unpaid content creators while publishing the defamatory statements, and which by refusing and potentially destroying any information would allow the anonymous content creators to be identified. 237. Defendant Gawker has demonstrated a track record and a procedure, which Plaintiffs have established, of inciting defamatory statements from anonymous content creators, 20 publishing said statements, and then skirting liability by carefully and subtly publishing their own thoughts on the 21 statements without confirming or denying them, playing it all 22 off as "news." 19 23 24 25 26 use-of 238. Defendants are state actors by virtue of their CDA § 230, in that they use that statute as a shield to enable them to take otherwise illegal and unconstitutional actions. 27 28 61 an 239. When a state actor inserts itself between such individual and the individual’s realization of his rights, is Constitutionally impermissible. Charles C. 240. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiffs mQONWvbWNI-l and Johnson and Got News, LLC have been damaged in reputation lost have suffered pecuniary damages of lost business and as business investments, due to damaged business reputation, defend well as the need for Plaintiff to file this lawsuit to fees, in an his good name and the related costs from attorney’s V 11 12 l3 14 15 16 17 18 19 amount exceeding $2,000,000. ‘WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants fair on Count VI of this Complaint and for such damages as are other and reasonable, together with interest and costs, and such and further relief as the court shall deem proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff requests a trial by jury, on all issues in this case which are so triable. 20 21 22 23 24 Dated this 25 28 ER 9, 2015 (44. Char es C. fiafifiéon 26 27 k CE INDEX OF EXHIBITS 62 EXHIBIT m\l0\U1vl>-LA)Ni-' 7 DOCUMENT ' Tweet written by Greg Howard with a link to l‘Whi<;h of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors are true?” 12/25/2014 Tweet written by Anna Merlan with a link to: "Wait Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One Time?” 12/9/2014 10 12 Tweet written by Erin Gloria Ryan with a link to: "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors 13 Are True?" 12/15/2014 11 14 16 Tweet written by Taylor Berman with a link to: "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors 17 Are True?" 12/15/2014 15 18 20 to:Tweet written by Adam Weinstein with a link "Wait Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit 21 On The Floor One Time?" 12/9/2014 19 22 24 Tweet written by Adam Weinstein saying "when chuck Johnson poops on your floor allegedly" 25 [Sad kitten picture]. 4/8/2015 23 26 27 28 Tweet written by Adam Weinstein with a link to: "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors 63 Are True?" 12/15/2014 Tweet written by Gawker with a link to: "The Daily Caller Can’t Quit Chuck Johnson" 12/9/2014 KomQONUlIh-UJNl—I Tweet written by Gawker with a link to:‘ "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web’s Worst Journalist Explained" 12/9/2014 Ho HN Tweet written by Gawker with a link to: "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors Hu Are True?” 12/15/2014 HH 10. Ha Hm Tweet written by Gawker with a link to: "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web's Hu Worst Journalist Explained" 5/24/2015 Hm ll. Hm No Tweet written by Gawker with a link to: "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors NH Are True?" 6/8/2015 Ho NA 12. M Nw l3. Are True?" by J.K. Trotter 12/15/2014 Np Nm Nm Nu "Which of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors 14. "Wait, Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One Time?" by Greg Howard 12/9/2014 Nm 64 15. l6. "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web’s Worst Journalist, Explained" by J.K. Trotter 12/9/2014 llThe Daily Caller Can’t Quit Chuck Johnson" by J.K. Trotter 12/9/2014 \oooqoxmpH l7. 18. 19. 20. Comments from, "Wait Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson Shit On The Floor One Time?" 12/9/2014 Cmcalumna Kinja Comment History Comments from, "What is Chuck Johnson, and Why? The Web’s Worst Journalist, Explained" 12/9/2014 Comments from, llWhich of These Disgusting Chuck Johnson Rumors are True?" 12/15/2014 NNNNNNNNNI—‘i—‘I—IHt—‘HHI—‘I—IH mummpI—looooqmmhwwwo 21. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "TheOneWhoKnocks" 12/15/2014 22. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "m" 12/15/2014 23. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "Russianist" 12/15/2014 65 24. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "ihatepickinggames" 12/15/2014 25. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "cassienyc" 12/15/2014 ooqoxmpr—I 26. J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, "Josh Wolf” 12/15/2014 10 27. "yankeeinchucktown" 12/15/2014 ll 12 13 J.K. Trotter discussion with fellow commenter, 28. Comment made by "hiphoptimusprime" to J.K. Trotter 12/15/2014 14 15 17 Tweet written by Greg Howard with a link to: "Wait, Did Clowntroll Blogger Chuck Johnson 18 Shit On The Floor One Time?" 12/9/2014 16 29. 19 20 30. 21 22 31. 23 24 25 32. 26 27 28 33. "GotNews" comments at Cmcaluma 12/9/2014 Cmcalumna defecation allegations against Mr. Johnson, directed to Greg Howard 12/9/2014 More Cmcalumna defecation allegations against Mr. Johnson, directed to J.K. Trotter 12/9/2014 Jordan Sargent comment to Greg Howard 66 12/9/2014 34. Greg Howard post stating, "There is some good—ass Kinja to be had” linking to his defamatory article 12/9/2014 (XJ\IO\U1.PUJN 35. Statement of Charles C. Johnson 10/15/2015 10 Recent Tweet written by Greg Howard once again Implying Mr. Johnson defecated on the floor in 11 college. 6/18/2015 36. 12 13 37. Facebook Post written by Mr. Johnson 12/9/2014 38. Email conversation between Mr. Johnson and 14 15 Mr. Trotter 12/12/2014 16 17 18 39. Mr. Howard 12/9/2014—12/12/2014 19 20 21 Email conversation between Mr. Johnson and 40. Charles Barkley article written by Mr. Howard 12/4/2014 22 23 25 Budweiser advertisement from Gawker website, Demonstrating their St. Louis targeted 26 advertising 24 41. 27 28 42. Table of Defamatory Statements 67 68