MicroWave

Mark Robinson sues CNN over report he wrote racist posts on porn website

https://lemmy.world/post/20886150

Mark Robinson sues CNN over report he wrote racist posts on porn website - Lemmy.World

CNN report said North Carolina candidate for governor made explicit posts on website’s message board Mark Robinson [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/20/mark-robinson-north-carolina-governor-race], North Carolina’s lieutenant governor, announced a lawsuit Tuesday against CNN over its recent report alleging he made explicit racial and sexual posts on a pornography website’s message board, calling the reporting reckless and defamatory. The lawsuit, filed in Wake county superior court, comes less than four weeks after a television report that led many fellow GOP elected officials and candidates, including Donald Trump, to distance themselves from Robinson’s gubernatorial campaign. Robinson announced the lawsuit at a news conference in Raleigh.

Oct 15, 2024 at 6:14pmWeb
Show threaddogslayeggsOct 15, 2024
“Calling the report reckless and defamatory” but not incorrect.
Show threadchickenf622Oct 15, 2024
Defamatory implies it’s false
Show threadimaqtpieOct 15, 2024

True. Though if you read the original CNN article, the circumstantial evidence is fairly damning. I don’t think he has any chance of getting out from under this.

Also, in a legal context, I think there very well may be a distinction between claiming a report is defamatory versus claiming it is false. As per Wikipedia:

The precise legal definition of defamation varies from country to country. It is not necessarily restricted to making assertions that are falsifiable

‘I’m a black NAZI!’: NC GOP nominee for governor made dozens of disturbing comments on porn forum

Mark Robinson, the controversial and socially conservative Republican nominee for governor of North Carolina, made a series of inflammatory comments on a pornography website’s message board more than a decade ago, in which he referred to himself as a “black NAZI!” and expressed support for reinstating slavery, a CNN KFile investigation found.

CNN
Show threadrtxnOct 15, 2024

distinction between claiming a report is defamatory versus claiming it is false.

A statement is not defamatory if it’s not false. It might be embarrassing and potentially damaging, but not defamation.

“There are five essential elements to defamation: (1) The accusation is false; and (2) it impeaches the subject’s character; and (3) it is published to a third person; and (4) it damages the reputation of the subject; and (5) that the accusation is done intentionally or with fault such as wanton disregard of facts.” - Ron Hankin, Navigating the Legal Minefield of Private Investigations: A Career-Saving Guide for Private Investigators, Detectives, And Security Police, Looseleaf Law Publications, 2008, p. 59.

Show threadimaqtpieOct 15, 2024
Sure, but you don’t need to prove that it’s false to claim defamation. As long as the defense is unable to prove that the accusation is definitively true, it could still be considered defamation. If he were to claim the report was false, then he’d have to provide evidence to that effect. By saying that it was defamatory, he only has to demonstrate that there is a lack of 100% certainty as to whether it is true or false, shifting the burden of proof onto CNN.
Show threadrtxnOct 15, 2024
[citation needed]
Show threadusernamesAreTrickyOct 15, 2024

Maybe for other countries, but this was filed in the US where that’s not the case at all. You need it to not only show it’s false, but that the person making a false statement knew it was false be or acted with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not

The CNN report was pretty damning and with how extensively they laid out the evidence that tied Robinson was to it, it’d likely be extremely difficult to show 1) that it was false or 2) that they acted recklessly when they were pretty through

EDIT: and to clarify the “person making a false statement knew it was false be or acted with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not” is the standard for finding fault with the person making defamation when the actual malice is used (which is the case for government officials or public figures)

Show threadimaqtpieOct 15, 2024

I dunno about that, because many statements are unfalsifiable. If someone accuses me of being a witch, how can I be expected to “show it’s false”? If you can show that they

acted with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not

Then it’s not necessary to prove that it’s false.

I understand and agree that the burden for proving defamation in the US is quite high, but it’s not always possible or necessary to demonstrate that the accusation is absolutely false.

Show threadusernamesAreTrickyOct 15, 2024

That’s not the alternative to proving it being false, that’s the alternative to it being knowingly false. You have to show all four of these things for US defamation

To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.

It’s the 3rd fault one that is the knowingly false or reckless disregard for the truth

As a result, a defamation plaintiff in an American court must prove that the allegedly defamatory statement is false and that the defendant was at fault for publishing it. “Fault,” in the case of a government official or a “public figure,” means that the defendant published the defamatory statement with “actual malice” – which means that he knew it was false or at least recklessly disregarded whether it was true or false

carter-ruck.com/…/defamation-and-privacy-law-in-u…

Defamation, Privacy and Data Protection Law in the USA

Detailed media law guide insights into defamation, privacy and data protection law in the USA by John J. Walsh and Alan S. Lewis of Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP

Carter-Ruck
Show threadArcherOct 15, 2024
Not in South Korea. Truth is not actually a defense to a defamation claim, wildly enough
Show threadrtxnOct 16, 2024
Same in Japan. I remember a case where a convicted pedophile successfully sued Google into blocking news articles saying he had been convicted of pedophilia.
Show threadrtxnOct 15, 2024

Actually he is. Calling something defamatory implies that the statement is false. The inverse is also true: if a statement is true, then it’s not defamation.

(source: I was hyperfixated on the Depp v. Heard trial)

Show threadTransplantedSconieOct 15, 2024

Ooooh. Discovery, you say?

Bet that will unearth even more Nazi/Porn weirdness.

Show threadrtxnOct 15, 2024

I think it’s more likely that he’ll demand to settle or simply drop the lawsuit. Typical SLAPP behaviour.

CNN will likely try to have it dismissed because the legal fees will surely be astronomical.

Show threadMimicJarOct 15, 2024
Sadly it won’t ever get to that phase. This is just so he can claim it’s a lie between now and election day. He’ll quietly drop the lawsuit about a week after the election.
Show threadFlying SquidOct 15, 2024
Possibly, but I could also see WB countersuing. They really don’t have much to lose there.
Show threadTheDoozerOct 15, 2024
I wish it were required that both parties agree to the lawsuit being dropped for it not to continue. I’d love to see this frivolous bullshit forced into a courtroom against the plaintiffs will by the defendants.
Show threadmosiacmangoOct 15, 2024
You can counter sue, so we kind of have that system.
Show threadcybervseasOct 15, 2024
Things have been so crazy I forgot about this. Thanks for the reminder, Mark Robinson.
Show threadandrewtaOct 15, 2024

This will be an interesting court case.

If cnn can prove what they reported then he’s just digging a deeper hole.

If cnn can’t prove it they are in deep doggy doo doo.

Show threadAtelopus-zetekiOct 15, 2024
I'm going out on a limb, just a hunch really, and I think CNN will come out of this just fine. Robinson is the man with a shovel, and he's gonna dig.
Show threadFlying SquidOct 15, 2024
Robinson’s entire defense so far has been to claim this is a hoax and when asked how posts on pages going back years can be hoaxed, he gives a “trust me, bro” response.
Show threadZeroCoolOct 15, 2024
Yeah, the dude got caught dead to rights. This is a poor attempt at damage control but an excellent example of the Streisand effect. Whether he wins or loses in November I expect the suit will be dropped after the election because he doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
Show threadFlying SquidOct 15, 2024

Ah, the old Trumpian tactic of suing someone for telling the truth.

I’m betting Warner Bros. has more money and better lawyers than you, Mark.

Show threadAzamandrielOct 15, 2024
What a dunderhead.
Show threadFlying SquidOct 15, 2024
Please, that’s “Lt. Governor Black Nazi Dunderhead” to you.