Media giants face truth-check after Trump wins lawsuit

Listen To Story Above

The media landscape is experiencing a significant shift following ABC News’ $16 million defamation settlement with Donald Trump, causing considerable concern at the New York Times about increased media accountability. The Times’ response to this development has been to mischaracterize legitimate legal challenges against false reporting as attacks on “critical coverage.”

The situation highlights a growing trend of holding media outlets responsible for their reporting accuracy. ABC News’ settlement stems from George Stephanopoulos’s incorrect statement claiming Trump was found “liable for rape” in a civil trial, when the actual finding was liability for sexual abuse.

🚨 BREAKING 🚨 UNBELIEVABLE

"What George Stephanopoulos said in that interview seems to hold up what the judge said after the fact"

MSNBC Symone Sanders – Thompson

Raise your hand ✋️ if you want Trump to sue MSNBC for spreading the same lie ABC did
pic.twitter.com/XAPLwTlEJz pic.twitter.com/AJfhzdbY4T

— @Chicago1Ray 🇺🇸 (@Chicago1Ray) December 15, 2024

The Times’ coverage appears selective in its framing, presenting these legal challenges as threats to press freedom rather than accountability measures. This perspective becomes particularly evident in their reporting of the ABC settlement, where they minimize the significance of the incorrect reporting that led to the legal action.

Media lawyer Elizabeth McNamara anticipates an increase in such legal challenges, citing the current political climate. This environment has been shaped by numerous controversial media narratives, including various disputed stories about Trump, from Russia collusion allegations to claims about his actions during his presidency.

The implications extend beyond immediate legal consequences. As Ed Morrissey points out, there’s growing concern within media circles about these cases potentially reaching the Supreme Court. Justice Neil Gorsuch has already expressed concerns about current defamation standards, writing that the existing framework has evolved into “an ironclad subsidy for the publication of falsehoods by means and on a scale previously unimaginable.”

The situation has broader implications, particularly regarding the Supreme Court’s potential reconsideration of defamation protections under the Sullivan doctrine. This legal standard, established in 1964, sets a high bar for proving defamation against public figures.

The controversy extends to other potential legal actions, including Trump’s announced intention to sue the Des Moines Register and pollster Ann Selzer over polling practices. Similarly, defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth has indicated his willingness to pursue legal action against false accusations.

Megyn Kelly tearing George Stephanopoulos to shreds. Today it’s costing ABC 15 Million and he has to apologize.
pic.twitter.com/UPCkogLC9I

— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) December 14, 2024

Notably absent from the Times’ extensive coverage is any substantial discussion about truthfulness in reporting. Their 1,500-word article defending media practices lacks explicit reference to truth as a journalistic principle, instead focusing on protecting current legal protections against defamation claims.

This development represents a potential turning point in media accountability, challenging long-standing protections that some argue have enabled less rigorous fact-checking and verification processes in modern journalism.