By now, you've probably heard that Terry Bollea, better known by his stage moniker of Hulk Hogan, has won his lawsuit against Nick Denton and Gawker Media. In fact, the court's decision went beyond the original $100 million that was sought and awards Hogan an extra $15 million in damages. Keep in mind that this combined $115 million that Nick Denton's Gawker has been ordered to pay doesn't yet take into account punitive damages. These further damages are set to be decided upon by the jury at the end of this month.

But Nick Denton isn't the hardest hit by Gawker's $115 million loss.

Update 1. Since the publishing of this article, the jury has decided to award Hogan an additional $25 million in punitive damages. That brings the total cost of Gawker's poor editorial management to $140 million. End.

Update 2. According to CNBC, Gawker has officially filed for bankruptcy. The unscrupulous media company's assets are reportedly to be put up for auction in the near future. End.

Instead, the real losers of the #HulkVSGawker lawsuit are every single current and former employee of Gawker Media. Think about it. A Florida court has just judged Gawker Media to be the most unethical of muckrakers when it comes to journalism of any sort. To make matters worse, Gawker's former Editor-in-Chief A.J. Daulerio has apparently given us such brilliant (sarcasm, of course!) commentary on how he believes child pornography would be in the "public interest" if it contained the children of celebrities "over the age of four."

The only good news is that Gawker's change in editorial tone seems to have largely started with Daulerio's tenure at the company in 2012. Unfortunately, that change in tone seemed to have carried over to other Gawker Media-owned properties, such as Jezebel (infamous for allegedly doxxing minors over tweets in 2012), Gizmodo (previously barred from Apple events for four years), and Kotaku (which inspires a mixture of eye-rolls and middle-fingers from gamers and game developers alike).

So, anyone who worked for Gawker before then shouldn't have much to worry about.

While I don't want to pass judgement on Gawker's employees, I have over five years of experience compiling competitive intelligence. That experience has shown time and again that a company culture in which good ethical conduct is a low priority tends to foster a hiring practice of employees who have little integrity at best.

Of course, this isn't always the case. But at the very least, if you have worked for Gawker or a Gawker Media property since 2012, I would highly suggest that you reconsider whether including 'Gawker' on your resume or LinkedIn profile adds value... or detracts from it. It's not uncommon for pro-active social media analysts and specialists like myself to look into people's online and published professional histories for clients. As of the Gawker trial, I can honestly say that there are very few to zero circumstances under which I would recommend any client or employer of mine should work with someone who has "Gawker" listed in their resume for the past four to five years.

The sad truth is that 'Gawker' doesn't have to be on your resume. 'Gawker' is over. What's left of its current employees know that. Social Media Analysts know that. And more importantly, HR recruiters know that.

But, those are just my thoughts on the subject. If you've found them useful and would like to encourage me to share more, please consider supporting my Patreon. You can also just follow me on Twitter, @ThatAwesomeTerr.