Posted on 02/16/2017 9:18:17 PM PST by Beave Meister
A defamation suit is allowed to survive in a defeat not only for the cable news network, but also for the MPAA.
Donald Trump probably doesn't know about it, but the guy who once said he wanted to open up libel laws will probably be quite pleased by a new ruling from a Georgia federal judge. In fact, the stakes in this case are so high we wouldn't be surprised if it eventually lands before the U.S. Supreme Court and potentially makes it easier to sue entertainment and media outlets. There's a reason why the Motion Picture Association of America submitted an amicus brief in this case.
The lawsuit is Davide Carbone v. Cable News Network.
Carbone was the chief executive of West Palm Beach, Fla.-based St. Mary's Medical Center until CNN reported in June 2015 that the infant mortality rate for open-heart surgery there was three times the national average. Reporters for Anderson Cooper's CNN show aggressively covered the death of babies at the hospital and even went to Carbone's home in an attempt to get comment. Instead, he closed his garage door on them. Later, he was forced to resign. His defamation lawsuit followed.
What makes this case so important is how a judge addressed CNN's attempt to strike the lawsuit.
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodreporter.com ...
Given CNN’s high fake rate, this might prove to be an interesting challenge.
Bookmark CNN
If it really hurts the MPAA, they’ll just throw more megabux at politicians and get them to quickly change the tort laws
especially in the health field where there is absolutely no bounds that they won't cross to make a story....
CNN’s goal is for every facility to have below average mortality rates.
They need to start a Fake News Anonymous support group for recovering fake newsers.
Risk-adjusted. That was my first thought when I read what this case was about. If you are the go-to hospital for high risk surgery, that which other hospitals avoid performing, then of course your mortality rate is going to be higher.
As far as anti-SLAPP statutes go, isn’t the thought to protect the Davids against the Goliaths who have the resources to crush the little guy? Well, the “David” is identified by name here :)
With freedom comes responsibilities. The press doesn’t like being held to account when they damage someone.
My own belief is that public figures should have no more and no less protection than anyone else. The LSM have abused their protection to the point that most good people avoid becoming public figures if they possibly can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.