A consultancy firm has filed a defamation lawsuit against CNN, claiming that the network and one of its reporters misrepresented the nature of the company's work, and it is focused on CNN presidential debate moderator Jake Tapper's program.
CNN defended themselves by saying that their terminology was "opinion or ambiguous" and that it had no malicious intent.
Tapper will co-host his network's first presidential debate on Thursday of next week. Former President Donald Trump, who will take part in the discussion, has criticized the presenter for his perceived bias, branding him as a "Fake [Jake] Tapper."
However, as the well-known CNN personality gets ready for that discussion, security consulting company Nemex Enterprises and its owner, Zachary Taylor, are suing him on behalf of his employer. Taylor assisted in the evacuation of Afghanis after the Taliban overthrew that nation in a chaotic manner.
"Jake Tapper has never been able to break the habit of working for Democratic politicians since he began his career. In an attempt to deflect attention from Biden's catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan, he and his CNN program denigrated a hero who rescued the lives of those Biden had placed in danger. Now that Tapper will be moderating the presidential debate with the guy he lied for, CNN is dealing with a billion-dollar slander lawsuit. Amazing," said Dan Schneider, vice president of the Media Research Center, a watchdog group that tracks conservative media, in a statement to Just the News. His group said that CNN had since removed the contentious TV segment from its website.
The lawsuit and CNN's defense of the network are undoubtedly igniting the opponents who have accused it of bias. According to a May 2024 YouGov survey, there is a 96-point difference in trust between Democrats and Republicans for CNN, making it one of the most divisive metrics when comparing perspectives. CNN is considered "The Most Trusted Name in News." A Gallup survey from October 2023 indicates that Americans' general faith in the media has likewise decreased, plunging to an all-time low last year.
Even Chris Licht, the former chairman and CEO of the publication, admitted the network's difficulties the previous year. He told the Los Angeles Times, "There was a general sense that you would not get a fair shake and you would not be allowed to make your point." "I do not want CNN to be a site where you go to raise money because you are going to have such a hostile experience there. According to reports, Licht said, "It is best for our audience to understand where everybody is coming from."
Last year, Licht left CNN unexpectedly after receiving backlash for his attempts to push for a change to more impartial news coverage and for overseeing the dismissal of prominent personalities, such as Don Lemon.
Young and Nemex won earlier this month when a Florida Court of Appeals determined that CNN's coverage of their work in Afghanistan included "sufficient preliminary evidentiary showing of actual malice."
The case's history was summed up in the court's ruling as follows: "On November 11, 2021, reporter Alex Marquardt's video feature on CNN's 'The Lead with Jake Tapper' broadcast on Afghans seeking to leave the Taliban using private evacuation operators like Young. Marquardt's reporting was packed into a digital piece on CNN's website, reprinted on another CNN show, and shared on Facebook and Twitter throughout the course of the next several days.
Young filed a defamation and trade libel lawsuit against CNN, claiming that the news station's coverage had harmed his image. In particular, Young said CNN misrepresented his job as exploitative and accused him of operating in a "black market" on many occasions because he demanded "exorbitant" rates that Afghan civilians were unable to pay. The verdict states that Young argued he suffered more since he was the sole private evacuator included in the reportage.
The complaint included internal correspondence from other CNN staff members who expressed concerns about the report being "incomplete," "a mess," and lacking "fleshed out for digital." The "story is 80% emotion, 20% obscured fact," according to the judgment, was another internal critique.
According to the appellate court's decision, CNN justified the publication of the article and TV segments by stating in court documents that it "did not intend to harm," "its language was either opinion or ambiguous," and "the internal communications were journalistic bravado that reflected a sincere belief in the reporting."
