Project Veritas' suit against NYT allowed to proceed
-
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/03/21/project-veritas-wins-victory-against-new-york-times-in-defamation-action/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Project Veritas won a major victory against the New York Times this week in a defamation case with potentially wide reach. In a 16-page decision, New York Supreme Court Justice Charles Wood ruled against the newspaper’s motion to dismiss and found that Project Veritas had shown sufficient evidence that the New York Times might have been motivated by “actual malice” and acted with “reckless disregard” in several articles written by Maggie Astor and Tiffany Hsu. The decision will allow the Project access to discovery which can be extremely difficult for a news organization.Notably, this follows another significant loss by the New York Times to Sarah Palin last year. Having two such losses for the New York Times in the defamation area is ironic given its role in establishing the precedent under New York Times v. Sullivan...
In this case, Astor and Hsu were accused of libeling Project Veritas by stating their opinions as fact in the articles on video clips that purportedly showed illegal voting practices by campaign workers for Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). One article by Astor on Sept. 29 was titled “Project Veritas Video Was a ‘Coordinated Disinformation Campaign,’ Researchers Say,” and reported how academic researchers found the video to be part of a “concerted disinformation campaign.” The article describes the project’s work as “deceptive.” Hsu followed up a month later with a story titled “Conservative News Sites Fuel Voter Fraud Misinformation” that again quoted academic experts in describing the work as “deceptive” and part of a “propaganda feedback loop.” Other articles follow a similar narrative.
The opinion is interesting because it calls out the New York Times for blurring the line between opinion and fact. It is a common complaint as major news media yield to the “echo chamber” model of journalism — appealing to the bias of readers or viewers in offering slanted coverage. The court calls out the newspaper for such blurring including this excerpt:
In a similar cycle, the Fox News host Sean Hannity and conservative publications magnified the reach of a deceptive video released last month by Project Veritas, a group run by the conservative activist James O’Keefe. The video claimed without named sources or verifiable evidence that the campaign for Representative Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, was collecting ballots illegally (NYSCEF#8 and #9)
The issue is whether Project Veritas should be given a chance to prove it case and the court found that it should:...
In the end, the court finds that there is sufficient evidence of “actual malice” by The New York Times to proceed in the case:..
The New York Times obviously could still prevail in the case. However, it is now facing difficult months of discovery absent a reversal of this decision. The actual malice standard is a great protection for the media. However, once a court finds a basis for the allegation, a wide array of evidence become material including the confidential communications between reporters can some of these sources or subjects. That can lead to drawn out litigation over confidentiality and demands for ex parte and in camera reviews by the court.
I expect to be teaching this case next year in my torts class when we deal with defamation.
-
We actually need to turn back the clock on libel laws.
-
-
@kincaid said in Project Veritas' suit against NYT allowed to proceed:
Expect there to be a bunch of wiped phones and other cover up shit going on.
I'm sure the Clintons have references for them...I would not use Hunter Biden's referrals...
