The 24-page complaint alleges “NBC News saw the death of Trayvon Martin not as a tragedy but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so set about to create the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain.”ADDED: More detail here.
६ डिसेंबर, २०१२
"George Zimmerman has filed his defamation lawsuit against NBC and three reporters for their false editing..."
"... of his non-emergency call to police to report Trayvon Martin..."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८४ टिप्पण्या:
I hope he gets good counsel.
I hope 30 Rock is soon called "Zimmerman Tower"
I hope he wins and wins big. I also hope he is cleared under stand your ground, so the farce of a real trial goes away.
This was the most vicious lying-by-editing I have ever seen.
I hope Zimmerman wins a fortune, because this should never happen again.
It's not just Zimmerman who was hurt. It was all of American. Truly evil.
I hope they have to fire Bob Costas to pay the judgement.
I too hope Mr. Zimmerman wins a pile of money. I note he's got a website. I wonder if that is calculated to show that no one really is looking at it, hence many still view him based upon NBC's intentionally false report.
I find it hard to believe that a network that found the Atlanta Olympics bomber and employs great journalists like Al Sharpton and Chris Matthews could be guilty of anything other than objective, fact-based journalism.
He deserves every thing he's going to get.
I must watch the next MNF. I can't wait for NBC Journalist Bob Costas to tell us he think's about this.
Good for him; he deserves a big payday.
It's not the most "vicious" lying by editing. They (liberal media) did similar things in CA to screw over Carly Fiorina, in which they cut out the middle of her sentence.
Similarly, they dragged out some illegal that brought down Meg Whitman, though she had followed the rules. Of course, I doubt the illegal was deported.
Sorry, this is confirmation, not confirmation Bias. Leftists will lie, indoctrinate, do whatever they can to get to their new religion.
I was in a quest to understand the liberal mind. Because it makes so little sense to me, and then I ran across this conservative comedian's article. It makes sense, in a perverse kind of way.
Extract:
You write that modern liberals reject the intellectual process as a moral imperative and that they always side with evil over good. Do you really believe that?
I do, and, in fact, one follows inevitably from the other. These are what I call the first two Laws of the Unified Field Theory of Liberalism. The first is that thinking is an act of bigotry to be avoided by all moral people and reviled when seen practiced by others. The rationale behind the outlawing of thought is that, anything a person concludes is going to have been so tainted by his personal prejudices – prejudices all people possess as simply part of the human experience based on things like the color of their skin, the nation of their ancestry, their height, weight, sex and so on, that the only way not to be a bigot is to never think at all.
The Second Law is that indiscriminateness of thought does not lead to indiscriminateness of policy, it leads — and, in fact can only lead — to the Modern Liberal siding with evil over good, wrong over right and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success. After all, if no culture, no religion, no form of governance or anything else is better than anything else, then the Modern Liberal has no explanation for success and failure. To those to whom indiscriminateness is a moral imperative (because its opposite is discrimination), success – as proved by nothing other than the fact that it has succeeded is all the proof that’s required for them to conclude that some injustice must have taken place. The same is true with failure. If nothing is better than anything else, then failure – as proved by nothing other than the fact that it has failed – serves as definitive proof that the failure has somehow been victimized. And the same is true of good and evil. If no person, culture, religion and so on is better or worse than any other, then anything society deems to be good can be said to be so only because of society’s bigotries. This led Thomas Sowell to conclude that, to those I call the Modern Liberals, “That which is held in esteem qualifies to be their target; that which is held in disdain qualifies to be their mascot.”
This was the most vicious lying-by-editing I have ever seen.
I hope Zimmerman wins a fortune, because this should never happen again.
It's not just Zimmerman who was hurt. It was all of American. Truly evil.
That's strongly stated.
Should he win a fortune?
Zimmerman is pretty obviously acquittable. Does that make him a lottery winner? Is this a game? Zimmerman has lost his fortunate life, maybe. How much was it worth?
Of course, this was also part of how the election was stolen, so, yeah, go get 'em, George.
For all us "white Hispanics".
"Zimmerman is pretty obviously acquittable. Does that make him a lottery winner?"
The lawsuit is over defamation, and the audio was edited to make him sound racist (to stir up America) when he was only answering a question from the 911 operator. This constructed a terrible lie that was immensely harmful to his reputation. That was defamation, and it stands apart from the subsequent incident in which Zimmerman killed Martin. Even if Zimmerman is convicted of murder, the incident the lawsuit is about was defamation.
So he wins the lottery?
This constructed a terrible lie that was immensely harmful to his reputation. That was defamation
Sorry, Ann, that's not the real crime. The real crime is portraying this "white/white Hispanic" guy as a black hating murderer. That's when it dropped off the MSM.
They need punitive damages, commensurate to their position in the community. They can easily make up the $ to Zimmerman. But how can they make it up to America? Maybe we have four more years of Obamao, in part, because if this.
@Dante,
I saw the same article you read and thought that this line was absolutely brilliant:
Modern Liberalism is a utopian ideology that is predicated on the notion that, since mankind lost paradise when Adam and Eve ate from the apple of knowledge, then mankind can return to paradise if only we’d all just “regurgitate the apple” and give up all knowledge of right and wrong.
In years of watching talk shows, I came to the conclusion that the comics were far & away the brightest of the entertainment class in front of the camera. Dramatic actors were often just amazingly dull. They were simply human templates for their roles, and outside of that were often more boring than your next door neighbor.
You want BS? Here it is, right here.
Drudge sez:
White House admits president's tax hike cannot pass Dem-controlled Senate...
How different:
The White House on Thursday dismissed as political mischief Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s offer to bring President Obama’s fiscal cliff plan to a vote on the floor, conceding the proposal would not receive the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/blogs/influencealley/2012/12/white-house-swats-away-mcconnell-s-suggestion-06
As if Republicans would filibuster a bill THEY brought to the floor. Unbelievable.
The Complaint in this case is very skillfully drafted by a high powered Philadelphia plaintiffs firm with deep pockets operating purely on contingent fee. It is filed in the Sanford Circuit Court, and is not removable. IMO, it will settle with a multi-million dollar payout to GZ. NBC will not want to go through discovery with a firm like this. You can be sure it didn't take the case unless it believed in total victory.
Professor, your emotion is running ahead of your reason.
Aside from where his case is heard, I'm sure that NBC will have the best legal team available and I assume that Zimmerman's will be contingency-based.
Much more important than getting Zimmerman a fair settlement would be the precedent of MSM networks having to factor such risk management into their future coverage. It seems to me that they just figured "what the hell anything goes" in the past. This needs to stop for everyone's sake.
Who knows, maybe they'll just negotiate a settlement beforehand. Betcha one's already been drafted.
I agree with Althouse.
The utterly innocent Zimmerman couple in Florida who were targeted because of Spike Lee's vicious tweet of their address should get something out of him as well. At least a day's worth of death anxiety.
I'll admit my emotions are running ahead of my reason. I hope Zimmerman's lawyers financially sodomizes NBC, bareback no lube. In a perfect world NBC would be bankrupt when the smoke cleared.
Hard to sue newspapers as you have to show intentional malice, but I hope he succeeds! They need suing bad!
We now know Zimmerman did have serious injuries, the kid was a small time hoodlum, and all the evidence points to a justified shooting. Thing is from day one the evidence showed that but both the news and authorities HID IT, TWISTED IT, and FAKED IT.
Sue them all!
Ann Althouse said...
This was the most vicious lying-by-editing I have ever seen.
I hope Zimmerman wins a fortune, because this should never happen again.
It's not just Zimmerman who was hurt. It was all of American. Truly evil.
So do you believe that his Stand Your Ground hearing will go in his direction?
Good for him.
I wouldn't want him to win lottery money but NBC was wrong and wrong in a major way and they need to be punished.
Maybe MSNBC becomes the Z-channel. For Z-man's legacy maybe a Drudge like channel where other media lies are exposed. Kind of like Myth-busters.
I can see a graphic of Dan Rather with a banned symbol as the logo.
I'd watch it a couple hours a day.
Winning a defamation lawsuit is not "winning the lottery".
Methadras:
So do you believe that his Stand Your Ground hearing will go in his direction?
My spidey sense sez you are a stoopid lib. When your head is being bashed into a concrete sidewalk by a powerful football player, you aren't "standing your ground." Of course, to a lib, maybe bending over and taking it the ass is "standing your ground." Who the fuck knows.
What a tard, you are.
Hard to sue newspapers as you have to show intentional malice, but I hope he succeeds! They need suing bad!
Intentional malice means "knowledge that the information was false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not."
Here NBC had the full tape, knew the truth about what Zimmerman said. The edited the tape in a way that falsely portrayed what he said, and did it in a way that made him look bad.
In this case, actual malice will not be as great a hurdle as it often is.
NBC did what they did to prtotect Obama and the Democrats. It is well documented that the Democrats were looking for a racially-charged case to solidify black support after their internal polling showed that Herman Cain might have taken 30% or more of the black vote due to the horrible economy. They had already started their "Republican War on Women" bullshit to firm up their female vote. The Democrats were looking for another church burning-type issue as had black civil rights leaders for a long time. Word has it that Kos and the good folks at TPM chose the Zimmerman case based on his name alone. Once Obama came out and practically convicted Zimmerman with his "if I had a son" speech, NBC assumed its role as the defender of the leftist faith and the prevailing meme--white people are killing black kids with impunity.
How about suing the Democratic Party for a $Billion for putting the crosshairs on him in the first place?
Mr. Ellison, your politics precludes reason. NBC intentionally edited the audio to make Zimmerman look like a foul racist.
I honestly don't know why you're okay with that, even if a court decides Zimmerman committed some form of murder. Intent matters, and from the full audio, racial prejudice doesn't seem to be a factor.
NBC decided to edit it so that it certainly appeared to be so.
Again, Ellison, why is that okay? And if it isn't, why should NBC be allowed to get away with it?
Where is trad guy to go attack-dog on George Z?
Re: Lottery.
In Ellison's mind, any "white" man who kills a [insert bigoted descriptor here] and then, in a weird series of events, wins a defamation claim has won the lottery.
If you think about it in those terms, you see just how warped the Ellisons in the world are.
Assumption: White men folk want to kill [insert bigoted descriptor here] just 'cause. (Unless they've gone to the proper schools and gotten the proper degrees, naturally. Then they're properly cleansed.)
Assumption: The facts of a particular case make no difference. Even if the white male showed no evidence of racism, he is of course a racist. Therefore, any judgement for him is unwarranted luck and a sign of the injustice inherent in the system.
And so even if Zimmerman goes to jail, if he wins the defamation case, Ellison is going to see it as Zimmerman winning the lottery.
Bah.
He deserves a decent amount for the clear defamation, but NBC should be forced to have all it's reporters and executives undergo diversity and ethics training, and perform community service helping people repair their credit after identity theft so they can learn the value of an innocent person's reputation.
If you understand that Zimmerman was a common citizen with very little voice, and you know who and what NBC is, then the level of wrongdoing and malice here is pretty severe, and something that should never go unpunished. If that level of media misuse of power does not make you emotional then you have no soul.
What is NBC's defense when they immediately fired those responsible for the editing? Isn't that a fairly obvious admission of wrongdoing?
That photo of Zimmerman from the night of the shooting is quite something, too. His nose looks absolutely smashed. Why is that shot only being released now? It's extremely supportive of Zimmerman's account. Guess I answered my own question.
GZ - two words:Lin Wood.
Zimmerman's life will never again be "normal" or what he would like it to be. Even if he gets a huge settlement he is forever a racist killer in millions of people's minds. I doubt he thinks of it as "winning" anything.
lol. The only thing that may come out of this is that we learn the name(s) of the people responsible who lied. Perhaps it goes further than a few producers.
but that won't matter much. Spencer Ackerman, who admitted he lied in stories to promote his political agenda, was given a job at Wired Magazine, which still has "credibility." Most likely, Ackerman will end up someday headlining a show at MSNBC, or even regular NBC. Meanwhile, "Delaware Dave" Wiegel is writign for Slate, and still being linked to as a "credible libertarian."
And let's not forget Al "Convicted Liar and Race Riot Starter" Sharpton and Ed "Voter Fraud" Schultz are MSNBC's hosts for an hour each, daily.
In short, credibility doesn't matter today. The suit won't do much.
NBC may work for a settlement to protect privacy, but that's short-term damage control. The commies there know that, long term, they're fine; Althouse will deem them credible again after a brief (6 month) cooling off period.
When the president himself is as bad as Barack Insane Obama, credibility doesn't matter. By Any Means Necessary does.
Seig Heil, Mein Obama!
P.S. And Zimmerman will still be hung by the leftists mobs. Remember what happened to in the Duke Rape Hoax? Hundreds of black people gathered at the local black college, and demanded the Duke kids' heads---even if there was no evidence of their wrong doing. The faculty wrote a public letter calling for their blood.
Now, Obama dropped a case against the Black Panthers and forgives each and every black transgression. Do you think that, even if the prosecutors fail, some black gang won't attack Zimmerman whilst Obama's Justice Department looks the other way?
lol.
This will settle quickly and quietly. NBC will give him $5 million and he will give them an exclusive interview after the trial.
Dante,
Hold you fire! Florida's "stand your ground" law has additional safeguards in the realm of self-defense. Methedras is being perfectly reasonable here.
If President Obama had a network, it would look like NBC.
Good on him.
"Hard to sue newspapers as you have to show intentional malice, but I hope he succeeds!"
-- Some claims are considered malicious on their face. For example, incorrectly identifying someone as a criminal is considered something which even the Associated Press does not defend; you print a retraction immediately. Accusations of racism, or any other bigotry, are likewise malicious on their face.
This, by the way, is why truth is the ultimate defense. Calling someone a bigoted such-and-such on the air is always malicious. But, if it is true, it doesn't matter. In this case, NBC not only -knew- it was not true (we have all of Zimmerman's past actions, such as advocating for a black man abused by the police, etc., to prove he is not a racist), but they also edited/doctored (depending on how generous you want to be) the tape.
There is no rational way to read this as not malicious.
chickelit said...
It seems to me that they just figured "what the hell anything goes" in the past. This needs to stop for everyone's sake.
I don't think this is true. I think those who edited that tape didn't believe they were doing anything wrong. They believed his mentioning race was proof this was race driven murder and the issue of being asked wasn't relevant.
The left cannot think straight when it comes to race, else they wouldn't be claiming criticism of Susan Rice is racist. They edited something out they believed was irrelevant, and to me this is far worse (for us, not for the case) than doing it intentionally.
Separately, my favorite Zimmerman media moment was Coates at the Atlantic proclaiming Zimmerman guilty on the basis of a grainy security video from 20-30 yards away that "proved" he had no injuries. Later of course we saw stitches on his head and the recently released broken nose color photo. Shockingly he hasn't retracted his conclusion. Well, not really, since that would require a touch of honesty.
Thank God for the conservative blogosphere is all I can add. Would Zimmerman have gotten a fair shake 20 years ago?
The propaganda spouted by the media about Zimmerman is typical of the Useful Idiot media. They did the same with the "Joker"-- an innocent patsy, framed by the anti-gun media.
But then the criminally and willfully blind media has been covering for the Usurper for years. It was so touching that the Usurper referred to Martin as "he could be my son"---gag... puhleeeease)
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa68.htm
Federalist 68 explains that in order to prevent foreign influence we must choose a "creature of our own" as chief magistrate, and avoid "an improper ascendant". That word "ascendant" was purposfully used by A. Hamilton in writing Federalist 68, since "A Dictionary of the English Language", 1755, by Samuel Johnson defines the noun "ascendant" (it is certainly a noun since it is preceded by the indefinite article "an") means both "inluence" and "ancestor".
(see 3 and 4 here on page 165):
http://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/?page_id=7070&i=165
The use of the words "raising a creature of their own" certainly signifies that natural born Citizens are defined by BLOOD, and that we should avoid an improper ancestor in order to avoid improper foreign influence given by blood. Barack Obama Sr. is an improper ancestor, and endowed Barack H. Obama with the blood of a British subject (forbidden since the ratification of the US Constitution). Therefore he is not an eligible natural born Citizen. The Useful idiot media-- Propaganda arm of the New World Order Central Bankers--- have been covering this fact for over 4 years now. What better way to void the US Constitution than by installing an illegal President? Can one born a British subject, and raised in a rats den of anti American family and friends be a "creature of their own"?
Filed in Fla.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/115893517/In-the-Circuit-Court-of-the-Second-J...
As a reminder of the edits:
NBC's storied "Today Show" broadcast before the entire world:
ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he's up to no good … he looks black.
Here's how the call really went:
ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
OFFICER: Okay, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.
So, progs who condemned him months ago --- any further comments you wish to make?
I find it hard to believe that a network that found the Atlanta Olympics bomber and employs great journalists like Al Sharpton and Chris Matthews could be guilty of anything other than objective, fact-based journalism.
I love that Obama met with them to discuss taxes. Sharpton --- whose entities owe a shade over $2.5M in taxes presently.
If you understand that Zimmerman was a common citizen with very little voice, and you know who and what NBC is, then the level of wrongdoing and malice here is pretty severe, and something that should never go unpunished. If that level of media misuse of power does not make you emotional then you have no soul.
I think it also kills the whole campaign finance arguments as well. If the media cannot be trusted, at all, to report news --- why should they have carte blanche on politics?
You so need a tag Lawsuits I hope will succeed.
Marshall quotes me:
It seems to me that they just figured "what the hell anything goes" in the past. This needs to stop for everyone's sake.
and says: I don't think this is true.
Let me be clear, Marshall: I suspect malice on NBC's part and an attitude that they could get away with it. The outcome will now play out. I think the facts are on GZ's side.
As a legal matter, is it even possible to defame someone merely by attributing to him a particular opinion, however discreditable?
Remember folks, gun ownership is on the decline!!!
Net sales from continuing operations for the second quarter were a record $136.6 million, up 48.0% from the second quarter last year. The increase was led by continued strong sales across all of the company’s firearm product lines, including M&P™ branded products, such as pistols, modern sporting rifles, and the recently launched Shield™ pistol designed for concealed carry and personal protection.
Not only that, but they think the future is equally confident…for gun sales at least.
The company expects net sales from continuing operations for the third quarter of fiscal 2013 to be between $126.0 million and $131.0 million, which would represent year-over-year growth from continuing operations in excess of 30.0%
Don't worry Jake Diamond will soon be here to assure us of "data" confirming his silly biases.
Garage Mahal was one of Trayvon Martin's biggest supporters and likewise acted like George Zimmerman's nemesis in the Althouse comment section.
Penny for his thoughts right now.
Ann Althouse said...
This was the most vicious lying-by-editing I have ever seen.
I hope Zimmerman wins a fortune, because this should never happen again.
It's not just Zimmerman who was hurt. It was all of American. Truly evil.
Oh come on Ann. When you want to make an omelete, a few eggs need to get broken.
Get the stick out of your butt and get on board with the agenda here.
Which is: whites gun down blacks in fits of racism rage in America all the time!
So shut up now!
Thanks.
to be truly fair, the judge should give Zimmerman editorial control to edit the words of all the NBC hosts who aired the doctored audio. Zimmerman should be allowed to edit the words of Maddow, Matthews, Williams, O'Donnell, etc. saying the most outrageously racist things to portray them as racists to America. No explanation allowed by NBC (lifetime gag order on the hosts) and the edits run on a continuous 3 month loop on NBC's channels.
"As a legal matter, is it even possible to defame someone merely by attributing to him a particular opinion, however discreditable?"
-- Yes, because the idea of behind defamation is that you've harmed someone's reputation, possibly in a way that is impossible to fix. People's reputations often are what let them get and keep jobs, make friends, etc. It goes to screwing someone's quality of life.
After all, there is no office to go to to get your reputation back
At some point NBS's license will come up for renewal.
Why should a network that deliberately, knowingly, falsly portrayed GZ as a racist have its license renewed?
NBS ???
Yiii, more coffee.
Gotta lay off that legal weed in the morning.
I find it hard to believe that a network that found the Atlanta Olympics bomber and employs great journalists like Al Sharpton and Chris Matthews could be guilty of anything other than objective, fact-based journalism.
It's not like they would take muslims to a Nascar race hoping for a confrontation or plant incendiaries on GM vehicles for a news report or anything ...
These are professionals we are talking about!
This is the network that aired Dateline's "Waiting to Explode" episode, which rigged the truck to explode by remotely triggering the explosion with model rocket engines.
That's not to say that product disparagement is equivalent to defamation, just to note that NBC has an extensive history of grossly dishonest "journalism" (the rigged truck explosion episode aired in 1992).
Perhaps justice will be done here, but does anyone really expect NBC's culture of dishonesty to reform itself?
Calm down everyone.
This is Zimmerman's lawyer arranging for a civil suit in the hope of getting his expenses paid. (Zimmerman is still in court - the actual trial is set for next June I think - with no end in sight.)
I hope they succeed in visiting justice on NBC, and I hope that Zimmerman will get to keep a substantial sum of the proceeds - he is going to need it - but very much the majority of it is going to the lawyers.
Personally, I wish there was some way to reeeach the SOB that wrote the Utube thing that stirred up this mess in the fitst place, but that gets into the 1st Amendment, etc., and of course, there is a possibility that it was not maliciously intended.
chickelit said...
I think the facts are on GZ's side.
I understand, and agree the facts are on his side although more with reckless disregard than intention to mislead. I don't believe they intended to mislead.
I find it improbable NBC believed they could keep the edited out segment from becoming public. You can't deceive the public if they are immediately presented with the missing data, so I conclude they didn't believe the missing data was meaningful. Essentially these staffers believed the tape in full proves Z's racist intent. Yes, this is borderline nuts, but we're talking about people in a liberal cocoon.
As further evidence, this hypothesis is perfectly consistent with lefty reaction to issue afterward. They still claim Z was racist as if NBCs fraudulent assertions were never made. Fake but Accurate.
"As a legal matter, is it even possible to defame someone merely by attributing to him a particular opinion, however discreditable?"
They misreported the quote. The fact that is false is that he said X. He did not say X.
Your point presumably goes to the issue of whether his reputation could be hurt by the false fact that he said something racist, not to the question whether NBC lied about him. That is, don't mix this up with cases that say opinions are not defamation.
"Hard to sue newspapers as you have to show intentional malice, but I hope he succeeds! They need suing bad!"
You're getting the doctrine wrong. The "actual malice" standard applies when the person suing for defamation is a public figure. It's not about who is sued but who is suing.
Actually, the person most at fault for this mess, may be the heretofore un-named entity that stepped in to prevent the Sanford PD from releasing the data and (un-edited) photographs that are now being furnished.
There can't be much doubt that if the police chief had been allowed to release the data, as he wished to do, back then this circus would not have been able to proceed.
It was a non-rhetorical question, not a "point"; I don't know what the law is here. It just seemed to me that falsely accusing someone of believing a certain thing, as opposed to doing a certain thing, is an unusual sort of defamation. If someone, knowing how false it is, were to call me a socialist, would I really be able to sue them for it?
over/under on when the family of treyvon martin sues after a settlement is reached with nbc?
i say 24 hours.
there was a couple that was threatened because spike lee tweeted their address, thinking it was zimmerman's. shouldn't they hold spike lee accountable via compensation?
I think it would be good for Zimmerman to be able to clear the higher hurdle, because I'm quite sure that NBC is going to at least argue that due to the Trayvon Martin case, Zimmerman is now a public figure.
"If President Obama had a network, it would look like NBC."
Why pay for the cow when you're getting the milk for free?
Marshal said... I don't believe they intended to mislead...You can't deceive the public if they are immediately presented with the missing data...they didn't believe the missing data was meaningful...believed the tape in full proves Z's racist intent.
You like my deletions?
Fake but Accurate? :)
chickelit said...
You like my deletions?
Are you implying I'm somehow misrepresenting you? It's entirely normal to highlight the element you're responding to.
Marshall wrote: Essentially these staffers believed the tape in full proves Z's racist intent.
If that were true than they would have felt no need to falsify and enhance what they already felt was true. I think it's more plausible that they felt compelled to diminish Zimmerman and chose what may be a tested method: tweak the evidence. Someone at NBC was thinking "Zimmerman must be a racist--how can we show it...how can we show it convincingly."
It's the difference between what they thought (to which they are entitled) and what they did.
Sorta like Dan Rather.
Hope, in addition to a monetary settlement, the judgement is for NBC to be off the air for 10 years.
Heh, heh.
Essentially these staffers believed the tape in full proves Z's racist intent.
The great thing about a jury trial is that a jury would get to listen to both the original call and the edited version and decide who the racist(s) was/were. And, since this wouldn't be a criminal trial, the jury probably wouldn't have to be unanimous.
My guess is that the network people are the ones most likely to be thought culpable here, which is why I would be surprised if this went to trial. Besides, I doubt that NBC wants all that much coverage by the other networks of its dirty laundry.
NBC should be required, aside from paying a lot of money, to produce "George Zimmermann, American Hero", detailing all his good works for minorities in his community, including ridding said community of a violent drug fiend. And show it a many times, and at the same times of week, as their defamatory coverage o f Zimmerman.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा