Would you want to witness the media’s contradiction in action? Think about how active the coverage of Donald Trump and his legal proceedings has been throughout 2024. Not only did Trump’s mugshot appear on every show for over a week, but his courtroom theatrics were also a highlight. We were able to watch in real-time as Trump traveled to the airport for his court hearing on at least two of the charges.
Other court cases involving the media are getting less attention, despite the breathless coverage of the former president’s legal squabbles; this is understandable. One reason for the overhype is that the press is actively attempting to undermine Trump’s chances of winning the election. Another point to consider is that legal actions against the media are not only occurring, but they are also achieving significant success.
Defamation lawsuits are infamously challenging to see through to any kind of resolution. First Amendment concerns are a major factor, but there are other common obstacles, such as the extreme difficulty of gathering evidence and proving causation. It is possible to interpret the present level of legal activity as an indication of the industry’s growing inability to uphold fundamental media standards.
It makes sense that the media would be reluctant to discuss lawsuits alleging slander against the sector. They’re also not as excited about two other cases involving a despised network (Fox), both of which have ended. Now that we have established this reality, let’s examine the intriguing assortment of media-related cases and their present status.
CNN v. Zachary Young
In the defamation case we’ve been following, the network is being sued for allegedly targeting a Middle Eastern private hot zone contractor whose career was destroyed by slanderous coverage. The judges have viewed enough evidence to proceed with a jury trial in this case, including newly disclosed internal correspondence that demonstrates malevolent approaches to the narrative and also contains faulty reporting.
In fresh filings this week, the plaintiff’s side responded to the network’s attempts to conceal further papers from disclosure, including the removal of some potentially incriminating material. Additionally, CNN is strongly pressuring the court to grant Jake Tapper’s deposition requests in this matter. Given how ugly this one appears to the network, a settlement attempt won’t come as a surprise.
Mahadev Amin vs. MSNBC
This relates to a number of reports submitted by Julia Ainsley, Danielle Silva, and Jacob Soboroff that appeared on various MSNBC shows, such as Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, and Nicolle Wallace. According to the allegations, border agents had Dr. Amin execute a protracted series of hysterectomies on a number of illegal immigrants, earning the doctor the nickname “The Uterus Collector.”
The $30 million lawsuit’s internal conversations throughout the discovery phase have shown the dearth of supporting evidence for this assertion. The reporters also confirmed that they could only locate proof of two surgeries conducted over a roughly two-year period. All of this was based on the single statement of an internal whistleblower at a Georgia hospital. The discovery records contained several erroneous claims, which the court addressed. Furthermore, the primary source for the reports acknowledged that hearsay accounted for a significant portion of her testimony.
Trump against ABC News
It is noteworthy that two of the defamation lawsuits Trump has filed have been considered favorable enough to proceed to the jury phase, especially in light of the extensive coverage of him. In one instance, a Florida court rejected Trump’s assertion that a jury may find George Stephanopoulos guilty of defaming him. This is from the tense conversation that ABC News’ anchor had with Representative Nancy Mace in March, during which they talked about the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, in which a jury found Trump guilty of violating her sexually. While the Carroll case did not elevate the decision to that level, Stephanopoulos consistently claimed that Trump was guilty of rape.
The Pulitzer Prize Board v. Trump
In a different Florida-based case, the court rejected the Pulitzer Prize board’s motion to have Trump’s libel action dismissed in light of the board’s decision to retain the prize money it had awarded for reporting on the Russian collusion story. This lawsuit is a result of the Pulitzer Prize’s 2022 announcement that it was retaining the honors it had bestowed years prior.
The New York Times and The Washington Post shared the 2018 National Reporting Prize for their reporting on Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. However, a debate ensued after the announcement of the prize: the release of the Robert Mueller Report revealed the absence of concrete evidence, contradicting the majority of the news from those sources. The lawsuit may now go to the always-exciting discovery phase thanks to this ruling.
Gina Carano vs. The Disney Company
This one relates to the actress’s long-running dispute with Disney about her termination from the television series “The Mandalorian” due to certain social media posts she made. The irony here was that she had written about intolerance and how it may lead to a Weimar Republic-style outcome in a post, but her co-star Pedro Pascal had made a far more provocative Nazi allusion in the same post and had not faced any backlash from the studio.
Carano accepted Xitter CEO Elon Musk’s offer to finance any litigation pertaining to this kind of termination for postings made on the site. Carano rejected the studio’s attempts to dismiss the case, including its absurd assertion that Gina had an equal claim to protection under the First Amendment. We now expect the matter to proceed to a jury trial or settlement.
Thereafter, in two instances concerning the media’s most despised and beloved subject, Fox News…
Biden Hunter vs. Fox News
The president’s recidivist son filed a vengeance pornographic lawsuit against Fox after the network used his private photos in the streaming series “The Trial of Hunter Biden.” In 2022, the series aired on Fox Nation’s streaming platform. According to Hunter’s lawsuit, the fictitious show featured explicit pictures of him as well as instances of him having sex.
Hunter’s attorneys submitted a voluntary dismissal notice to end the three-week-old lawsuit on Sunday, July 21, the same day his father said he would not be seeking the presidency.
Nina Jankowicz vs. Fox
This one seems to confirm the widespread belief that Jankowicz, the former chairman of the discredited Disinformation Governance Board, has been battling the truth for a very long time. The DHS department had established that group to counter misinformation, but it shuttered its doors in less than a month. According to reports, misinformation on social media contributed to the DGB’s downfall by misrepresenting it.
Using thirty-two examples of his personal deception on television, Jankowicz filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox. The judge dismissed her complaint after concluding that, in 36 of her 37 claims, Fox News cited the DGB rather than her, and that, in the one claim that remained, the network had provided a factual statement as it was only paraphrasing the board’s charter.
Author: Scott Dowdy
Comments are closed.