Posted on 09/15/2008 1:55:09 PM PDT by Zakeet
The photographer that viciously smeared John McCain at her website might be facing a lawsuit for violating the terms of agreement in her contract with The Atlantic magazine.
As NewsBusters reported Saturday, Jill Greenberg not only admitted to taking a rather sinister picture of the Republican presidential candidate that she hoped The Atlantic would use on its October cover, but she also generated some truly disturbing and disgraceful images of McCain which she proudly displayed at her website.
The magazine's editor, James Bennet, told Fox News's Megyn Kelly Monday that he was deeply sorry about this incident, and that The Atlantic isn't taking it lying down (audio available here, partial transcript follows, h/t NBer blonde) :
JAMES BENNET, EDITOR 'THE ATLANTIC': I'm already drafting a letter of apology [to McCain]. I mean, this photographer went in there under our auspices to take a covershot for us. Again, we stand by the picture, and we produced a terrific story on John McCain...But while she was there, she behaved in an incredibly underhanded and unprofessional way. [...]
MEGYN KELLY, HOST: What do you do to shut down her use on her website, not just of that covershot, but the disgusting things she has done to John McCain's image on her website which I won't repeat here?
BENNET: She's violated the terms of our agreement with her, or our contract with her. So, we're taking steps. We're looking into steps we can see to do something about that.
KELLY: Are you considering a lawsuit?
BENNET: We're looking into what we can do.
KELLY: Would that be including legal action?
BENNET: If we can, if it's available to us, yeah.
KELLY: Has she been paid?
BENNET: No.
KELLY: Will she be?
BENNET: No.
Clearly, this story isn't over yet...not by a longshot.
I found it amazing that she used the phrase “not sophisticated” in reference to McCain and his people not realizing what was happening. Sophisticated!
On what grounds would they sue her? She had every reasonable expectation that she was following their editorial policy and the standards they have set over the years.
On what grounds would they sue her? She had every reasonable expectation that she was following their editorial policy and the standards they have set over the years.
On what grounds would they sue her? She had every reasonable expectation that she was following their editorial policy and the standards they have set over the years.
I watched the Editor on Fox this morning and he has NOT paid this photographer was devastated at what she did, or at least acted like it, and he said he was talking to attorneys about suing her. He said she had done other work and was not familar with how bias she was. Fox announcer questioned that since she was able to google and see her work in the Dem party wondered why they would have hired her to photograph McCain. The photographer has McCains picture on her website looking spooky and I am just glad she is getting exposed for what she did and I hope they sue her for millions. That cover is not good, supposedly she made him red, including his eyes looked red. It’s so sad what that party will do ...they are evil, especially when losing. Losers...
Two possible scenarios:
1) Unsuspecting parents. If my child told me what this “photographer” did, I’d be posting to FR to solicit bail money.
2) Complicit parents. It is grotesquely fathomable that the parents of these children were moonbats themselves, and had full knowledge of what was going to happen. Sure, it’s their kid... but they were doing something for “the greater good” in BDS land.
Either scenario makes me fantasize about various uses for a shovel.
This is all BS that the Atlantic will sue the photographer. You are all being played.
The Atlantic was the magazine blog that spread the rumors that Palin’s daughter was really her granddaughter.
Don’t be played for a fool here.
The magazine is responsible for what it buys and publishes not the sub-contractors. The editors aren’t blind are they? But Atlantic Monthly has been publishing more biased stuff for decades than badly lighted pictures so where is their complaint?
More evidence that liberalism is a mental disorder!
More evidence that liberalism is a mental disorder!
The magazine is responsible for what it buys and publishes not the sub-contractors. The editors aren’t blind are they? But Atlantic Monthly has been publishing more biased stuff for decades than badly lighted pictures so where is their complaint?
You’re right. THEY had to have checked that picture out and seen the additional pictures taken before they chose the cover with red eyes and skin...and very unflattering. I am glad they are getting exposed. Thanks for posting...I hope they get their pants sued off!!! AND no one buys their magazine.
Now that’s an interesting idea!
I would hate to think of Atlantic Monthly getting a big settlement.
Exactly. Aren’t editors suppose to proof copy before publication? The buck stops with them - it is their fault for hiring this evil woman and not checking her work.
Atlantic has always been kinda lefty by default given it's founders who were crusaders and transcendentalists....like the New Yorker
NONE of this would have matter to Atlantic .. her doing it was ok; bragging about it online was what hunger her.
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.