Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few of us are able to understand that the kid is an entitled little sh#t, who needs to sat the F down and let grown as women decide what is best for their own lives and bodies.

And understand that what happened to him in the media was grossly irresponsible and as a society we need to expect more from journalists.

He got his retraction from WaPo. He doesn't get a defamation judgment and $250m. That's just silly.

Not good enough. Reporting ,” twitter says this” isn’t acceptable.

You'd rather they didn't report "Twitter says this"? Ostrich much?

I’d rather they actually did their jobs and checked their facts.

Twitter is a fact.

Defamation was the wrong avenue. Lin Wood took this on as a way to change current First Amendment law -- that means that under current law, the kid loses. Current law is not on his side.

JFC. Is that what’s its come to? Once reputable papers just report the rumors and throw their hands up after the fact. Democracy dies in the dark indeed.

How is quoting the opinion of someone on Twitter any different from quoting random people on the street (which journalists have done since the dawn of journalism to gauge public sentiment)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few of us are able to understand that the kid is an entitled little sh#t, who needs to sat the F down and let grown as women decide what is best for their own lives and bodies.

And understand that what happened to him in the media was grossly irresponsible and as a society we need to expect more from journalists.

He got his retraction from WaPo. He doesn't get a defamation judgment and $250m. That's just silly.

Not good enough. Reporting ,” twitter says this” isn’t acceptable.

You'd rather they didn't report "Twitter says this"? Ostrich much?

I’d rather they actually did their jobs and checked their facts.

Twitter is a fact.

Defamation was the wrong avenue. Lin Wood took this on as a way to change current First Amendment law -- that means that under current law, the kid loses. Current law is not on his side.

JFC. Is that what’s its come to? Once reputable papers just report the rumors and throw their hands up after the fact. Democracy dies in the dark indeed.

How is quoting the opinion of someone on Twitter any different from quoting random people on the street (which journalists have done since the dawn of journalism to gauge public sentiment)?

Talking to a witness. Not just Talking to a friend of the witness. Actually finding if the person even was a witness. Corroborating statements. Taking the time to find all the video of an incident, not just part of it....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few of us are able to understand that the kid is an entitled little sh#t, who needs to sat the F down and let grown as women decide what is best for their own lives and bodies.

And understand that what happened to him in the media was grossly irresponsible and as a society we need to expect more from journalists.

He got his retraction from WaPo. He doesn't get a defamation judgment and $250m. That's just silly.

Not good enough. Reporting ,” twitter says this” isn’t acceptable.

You'd rather they didn't report "Twitter says this"? Ostrich much?

I’d rather they actually did their jobs and checked their facts.

They did. You just don't like them. They also posted people's opinion of Sandmann, which you also did not like, but is fair to report.

Twitter is Twitter. And what they say is a "fact." Or people can do so. Most reasonable people know Twitter is of limited value anyway.

[Anonymous]

Twitter might have limited value, but it has limitless ability to destroy lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twitter might have limited value, but it has limitless ability to destroy lives.

Please. Gamergate was ugly but didn't destroy lives. This kid's life isn't destroyed either.

[Anonymous]

If PPs don't want media organizations to cover Twitter discussions, I guess they will just need to ignore POTUS's Twitter ramblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If PPs don't want media organizations to cover Twitter discussions, I guess they will just need to ignore POTUS's Twitter ramblings?

Try to dig yourself out of your identity politics long to understand that someone can hate Trump, think this kid sucks, AND that main stream media is irresponsible re: reporting of social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PPs don't want media organizations to cover Twitter discussions, I guess they will just need to ignore POTUS's Twitter ramblings?

Try to dig yourself out of your identity politics long to understand that someone can hate Trump, think this kid sucks, AND that main stream media is irresponsible re: reporting of social media.

This kid got his retraction. Beyond that? Nope, nada. Not $250m, not $25, nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twitter might have limited value, but it has limitless ability to destroy lives.

Please. Gamergate was ugly but didn't destroy lives. This kid's life isn't destroyed either.

Women were stalked, terrorized and physically threatened as a result of GamerGate. That was on a whole different level from this nonsense, which would have faded from public memory if the Sandmann family hadn’t continued to grab the spotlight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...

This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.

A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.

Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.

Filing frivolous lawsuits? Great strategy.

I totally disagree that it was frivolous, and I hope they pursue it further.

With the Washington Post? They were merely quoting statements made by others. That is not defamation. You need to stop letting emotion cloud your critical thinking. You should read the Constitution and its Amendments sometime. His lawyer should be counter sued for filing a frivolous lawsuit. He should know the elements of defamation. He probably knew it was a clunker and wasted everyone's time to enhance his own profile.

I'm not an attorney, but it's disgusting that news media sources can do that (I'm not necessarily referring to this case) without penalty.

+100
Completely agree. It’s such a cop out to say, “well, we were simply repeating what so and so said...” Like the school gossip who plays passive-aggressive while spreading gossip and lies.

You realize the Sandy Hook parents still haven’t gotten a judgement against Alex Jones, right? And his defense it literally: yes, I lied and ruined their lives, but I was PSYCHOTIC at the time. Right wing “news” reported Comet Ping Pong, amd no one got sued when it was shot up. Even though that was foreseeable.

Not in the mood for Cons to be atracking factually accurate reporting.

I’m not a conservative, and support the sandy hook parents AND this case. The 1st amendment isn’t freedom from consequences.

You have no critical thinking skills whatsoever. There is no commonality between the Sandy Hook parents and this kid, nor between WaPo and Alex Jones. Jesus Christ. You are dishonest as all hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...

This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.

A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.

Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.

Filing frivolous lawsuits? Great strategy.

I totally disagree that it was frivolous, and I hope they pursue it further.

With the Washington Post? They were merely quoting statements made by others. That is not defamation. You need to stop letting emotion cloud your critical thinking. You should read the Constitution and its Amendments sometime. His lawyer should be counter sued for filing a frivolous lawsuit. He should know the elements of defamation. He probably knew it was a clunker and wasted everyone's time to enhance his own profile.

I'm not an attorney, but it's disgusting that news media sources can do that (I'm not necessarily referring to this case) without penalty.

+100
Completely agree. It’s such a cop out to say, “well, we were simply repeating what so and so said...” Like the school gossip who plays passive-aggressive while spreading gossip and lies.

You realize the Sandy Hook parents still haven’t gotten a judgement against Alex Jones, right? And his defense it literally: yes, I lied and ruined their lives, but I was PSYCHOTIC at the time. Right wing “news” reported Comet Ping Pong, amd no one got sued when it was shot up. Even though that was foreseeable.

Not in the mood for Cons to be atracking factually accurate reporting.

I’m not a conservative, and support the sandy hook parents AND this case. The 1st amendment isn’t freedom from consequences.

You have no critical thinking skills whatsoever. There is no commonality between the Sandy Hook parents and this kid, nor between WaPo and Alex Jones. Jesus Christ. You are dishonest as all hell.

I didn’t bring up sandy hook as an example, you moron.
The point is that you are creating an imaginary Trump supporter to have an argument with. I am not that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...

This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.

A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.

Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.

Filing frivolous lawsuits? Great strategy.

I totally disagree that it was frivolous, and I hope they pursue it further.

With the Washington Post? They were merely quoting statements made by others. That is not defamation. You need to stop letting emotion cloud your critical thinking. You should read the Constitution and its Amendments sometime. His lawyer should be counter sued for filing a frivolous lawsuit. He should know the elements of defamation. He probably knew it was a clunker and wasted everyone's time to enhance his own profile.

I'm not an attorney, but it's disgusting that news media sources can do that (I'm not necessarily referring to this case) without penalty.

+100
Completely agree. It’s such a cop out to say, “well, we were simply repeating what so and so said...” Like the school gossip who plays passive-aggressive while spreading gossip and lies.

You realize the Sandy Hook parents still haven’t gotten a judgement against Alex Jones, right? And his defense it literally: yes, I lied and ruined their lives, but I was PSYCHOTIC at the time. Right wing “news” reported Comet Ping Pong, amd no one got sued when it was shot up. Even though that was foreseeable.

Not in the mood for Cons to be atracking factually accurate reporting.

I’m not a conservative, and support the sandy hook parents AND this case. The 1st amendment isn’t freedom from consequences.

You have no critical thinking skills whatsoever. There is no commonality between the Sandy Hook parents and this kid, nor between WaPo and Alex Jones. Jesus Christ. You are dishonest as all hell.

I didn’t bring up sandy hook as an example, you moron.
The point is that you are creating an imaginary Trump supporter to have an argument with. I am not that.

[Anonymous]

His parents made it worse for him. Oh well!

[Anonymous]

After reviewing an amended complaint, the case has been reinstated and will go to discovery.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/28/cov-cath-judge-rules-lawsuit-against-washington-post-can-continue/2489395001/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After reviewing an amended complaint, the case has been reinstated and will go to discovery.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/28/cov-cath-judge-rules-lawsuit-against-washington-post-can-continue/2489395001/

Good.