CNN Settles Lawsuit After $5 Million Defamation Verdict

CNN settles after $5 million defamation verdict : NPR

“CNN reached a legal settlement with a security contractor Friday after a Florida jury found the network had defamed him by suggesting he was charging ‘exorbitant prices’ to evacuate people from Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal in August 2021.”

“Details of the settlement have not been disclosed. But jurors found the network should pay $5 million to U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young for lost finances and suffering, and said he was eligible for more in punitive damages. The final figure could have been far higher.”

My interest in this case is not so much in the specific details but in the broader implications of a major media company being held accountable for practices that many view as commonplace. The “news organizations” now being referred to as legacy media have continually lost credibility by pushing agendas, presenting half-truths, and disparaging their targets. In this case, CNN encountered an individual willing to challenge the establishment media and their legal team. As the article highlights, suing these organizations is difficult due to laws that grant them immunity––protections that the average person lacks the means to challenge.

Here are a few facts about this case that reveal larger truths:

Real lives are affected by the unethical practices of the media.

All I know about the man victimized in this story is what I have read in this article. However, it is safe to assume he has a real life and was deeply affected by CNN’s actions. For too long, the media has gotten away with “playing god” in the lives of people they treat as disposable for a story.

A jury found CNN liable for defamation.

“The jury found CNN liable for defamation per se, meaning it had harmed Young by the very words it chose, and for defamation by implication, that is, it had harmed his reputation by the implications that a reasonable reader or viewer might take from the story.” This verdict is significant because a jury of ordinary people found CNN guilty of defamation. The facts were apparently compelling enough for them to see what had taken place and believe the network should be held accountable.

A half-truth is a lie.

If it is not 100% truth, it is, by definition, a lie. CNN was guilty of lying for the sake of sensationalism in a story. “For example, Fuzz Hogan, a senior director of standards for CNN, acknowledged in testimony under oath that he had approved a ‘three-quarters true’ story. Another editor, Tom Lumley, had said in an internal message that the piece was ‘80 percent emotion.’ On the stand, Lumley said that it still wasn’t his favorite story, but based his assessment on the storytelling rather than the reporting.”

CNN was not repentant.

In the lamest of apologies, CNN made it clear they were sorry they got caught––not sorry they lied to make something seem like what it was not. Making a mistake is one thing; we all do. Defending unethical practices without remorse for the damage done is entirely different.

In a world of corrupt media, may we learn from their harmful practices. We should be careful not to accept half-truths as fact. It is important to remember that real people are affected by things that are “almost” true.

Sadly, I know Christians who could work for CNN with no additional training.

Share This: