The One America Network just sued Comcast, MSNBC and Rachel Maddow for defamation. It stems from a refusal by Comcast to let its local cable networks carry OAN. That was followed by an exchange of emails and letters. It was topped off, however, when Rachel Maddow discussed OAN and said that the news it carried "“really literally is paid Russian propaganda.”
OAN has now sued. It points out that it is not a Russian company, it has no dealings with Russia or Russians and that it is paid nothing by anyone to carry particular news. OAN is seeking ten million dollars in compensatory damages and an unspecified amount of punitive damages.
Most likely, this dispute will end up being settled. Comcast is unlikely to want to face a jury when it could be hit with major damages.
OAN's claim seems pretty strong to me. In order to win, OAN will have to show that Maddow was either intentionally seeking to harm OAN or was extremely reckless in making the statement in question. It's not enough that the statement is wrong; it has to be either intentionally wrong or grossly negligent. Given the statement, however, that is not too hard to show. Normally a TV host like Maddow would say that according to sources, claims have been made that OAN is paid to carry Russian propaganda. That is sufficient to get by most libel claims. Maddow, however, didn't say that. Instead, she made a definite statement. She said OAN is "really, literally" paid to broadcast Russian propaganda. And remember, Maddow took no steps to attempt to determine if that claim was true. Neither Maddow nor anyone from MSNBC contacted OAN to ask about the claim. Maddow seems to have not a single bit of evidence to support her claim that OAN is a purveyor of Russian propaganda.
This will all be up to a judge. He or she will have to decide if a reasonable jury could conclude that Maddow and MSNBC acted recklessly or intentionally in making this attack. If that finding is made, it will be up to the jury to decide if OAN has been defamed and what damages it has suffered. Most likely, however, the jury is not going to be very sympathetic to a giant company like Comcast and its minions.
I predict again that this will be settled.
OAN has now sued. It points out that it is not a Russian company, it has no dealings with Russia or Russians and that it is paid nothing by anyone to carry particular news. OAN is seeking ten million dollars in compensatory damages and an unspecified amount of punitive damages.
Most likely, this dispute will end up being settled. Comcast is unlikely to want to face a jury when it could be hit with major damages.
OAN's claim seems pretty strong to me. In order to win, OAN will have to show that Maddow was either intentionally seeking to harm OAN or was extremely reckless in making the statement in question. It's not enough that the statement is wrong; it has to be either intentionally wrong or grossly negligent. Given the statement, however, that is not too hard to show. Normally a TV host like Maddow would say that according to sources, claims have been made that OAN is paid to carry Russian propaganda. That is sufficient to get by most libel claims. Maddow, however, didn't say that. Instead, she made a definite statement. She said OAN is "really, literally" paid to broadcast Russian propaganda. And remember, Maddow took no steps to attempt to determine if that claim was true. Neither Maddow nor anyone from MSNBC contacted OAN to ask about the claim. Maddow seems to have not a single bit of evidence to support her claim that OAN is a purveyor of Russian propaganda.
This will all be up to a judge. He or she will have to decide if a reasonable jury could conclude that Maddow and MSNBC acted recklessly or intentionally in making this attack. If that finding is made, it will be up to the jury to decide if OAN has been defamed and what damages it has suffered. Most likely, however, the jury is not going to be very sympathetic to a giant company like Comcast and its minions.
I predict again that this will be settled.
No comments:
Post a Comment