#1 George Zimmerman sues NBC over Trayvon Martin reports12-06-2012, 11:57 PM
Posted by Erik Wemple on December 6, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Lawyers for George Zimmerman filed suit today against NBC Universal Media over a well-publicized editing error that portrayed their client in racist terms in his pursuit of Trayvon Martin on a drizzly evening in February.
“NBC saw the death of Trayvon Martin not as a tragedy but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so to set about the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain,” states the civil complaint in its opening salvo against NBC.
NBC’s editing of the 911 audiotape in the Martin case became a public fixation after the media-monitoring Web site NewsBusters.org noted editing oddities on a “Today” show broadcast March 27. Here’s how NBC News portrayed the audiotape:
I hope when it is over it is ZNBC.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
12-06-2012, 11:59 PM
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
He should win big if there's any real justice left in this country.
12-07-2012, 10:57 AM
It's smart for him to go on the offensive at this point.
12-07-2012, 11:31 AM"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that you won't need it until they try to take it away."---Thomas Jefferson
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
12-07-2012, 02:13 PM
12-07-2012, 02:32 PM
NBC has a long line of these types of cases from Richard Jewell to GM... They will not learnGovernment is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
12-07-2012, 03:03 PM
12-07-2012, 03:28 PM
- Exposes a person to hatred, shame, disgrace, contempt or ridicule.
- Injures a person’s reputation or causes the person to be shunned or avoided.
- Injures the person in his or her occupation.
- Examples might include accusing someone of having committed a heinous crime, or of having a disease that might cause them to be shunned.
And, “'Published' in this context simply means that the libelous statement is communicated to someone other than the person being libeled. That can mean anything from an article that's photocopied and distributed to just a few people to a story that appears in a newspaper with millions of subscribers."
Zimmerman was not a public figure at the time of the publication, so he doesn't have to prove actual malice (although given the way that NBC has treated him, that shouldn't be too hard, either). The simple act of publishing a falsified audio meets the standard. Zimmerman could win significant damages, but what he ought to demand is a public admission of libel from NBC in the same venues in which the libel was published. I personally believe that this is a better punishment for a media outlet, being forced to admit that they are liars and frauds in their own pages or on their own shows, than simple monetary damages. It's a much more effective means of informing the public of their biases and the people who rely on them for information would see just how wrong they are. Unlike a third party fact-checker, a court-mandated retraction would actually reach all of the viewers of NBC's news programs, and inform them of the falsehoods that were reported.--Odysseus
Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.
Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|