They did not lie about a child they ran a story without vetting the entire story which sadly happens a lot.... Then issued a retraction/correction. Shitty and negligent but seen it from FOX news plenty of times..... Now it bothers people and the kid expects to earn millions? haha
There are several issues with what the Washington Post did: Nick Sandmann was not a public figure. (this is a very important point). Nick Sandmann was a minor. The papers incorrect reports about someone who was not a public figure caused threats to his life. The paper printed no correction and doubled down on its incorrect reporting. These are important points in why the suit is justified. Papers have a lot more leeway when reporting on public figures with negative press in the U.S. (and avoiding legal liability).
Nick is not a public figure but the video went viral all over social media... is that the Washington Post's responsiblity? they were just reporting, incorrectly on the video... Well everyone feels a suit is justified, the amount of damages he claims was ridiculous and just looking to punish the paper rather than for ACTUAL claimed damages. The lawyer is just fishing for money so don't put any altruistic intent on his part with these lawsuits. I did not see any Breitbart taking responsibility when that gunman went to the pizza place after a conspiracy story was published to be honest.... Oh and below proves the last allegation is wrong: Washington Post issues lengthy correction over Covington Catholic confrontation March 1, 2019 The Washington Post published a lengthy editor’s note Friday acknowledging errors in its coverage of a viral incident between high school student Nicholas Sandmann and Native American demonstrator Nathan Phillips in January.
I stand corrected about the last point --- how long did it take for WaPo to publish the correction after their initial news stories about the incident. This entire time period correlates to a period of time where a non-public person was enduring death threats, etc. due to their pushing non-factual information. As noted earlier the $250 million figure is eye popping... the paper and its insurer most likely settled for significantly less. Low end estimates are $50,000 to $200,000. Most medium estimates are high six figures or low seven figures. I expect the lawyer gets a good cut.
I agree. The question is now that CNN and WaPo settled, most likely for the amounts mentioned, and Nick and his lawyer said they are going after 6 or 7 more, the others might be very reluctant to add to this kid's riches. The courts are not there to make you rich, just compensate and those other media outlets, especially Twitter, will simply tell Nick to go pound sand and they will see them in court.
I believe that the mainstream media companies that Sandmann sues will simply follow the lead of their insurance companies and settle for a 6 figure amount or below to avoid the cost of lengthy litigation. The amounts will be confidential and the media companies will state they are not at fault in the settlements. If Sandmann sues Twitter or Facebook which are social media platforms rather than publishers -- -these companies will probably tell Sandmann to go pound sand & take it to court. I will note that there was an earlier article stating that most major publishers in the U.S. typically settle 20 to 30 of these type of suits per year. They simply view it as a cost of doing business.
yeah the attempt to sue twitter is funny...twitter will tell them to go fuck off... but I di think the later news outlets will see the kid as being opportunisitic and simply decide they were not in teh same fault as WaPo or CNN and just repeated the story and then corrected it when they knew. Some might fight...