this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
349 points (98.6% liked)

News

38069 readers
1870 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

CNN report said North Carolina candidate for governor made explicit posts on website’s message board

Mark Robinson, 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nougat@fedia.io 74 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Real news media doesn't make controversial statements about individuals unless they have proof. I am quite certain that before this story went to press, there were serious internal discussions at CNN about not only its validity, but about CNN's ability to demonstrate that validity in court.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

Yep. The truth is an absolute defense against defamation.

Yeah, this won't be like the Hulk Hogan/Gawker case. CNN doesn't play.

[–] cybervseas@lemmy.world 58 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Things have been so crazy I forgot about this. Thanks for the reminder, Mark Robinson.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Right, if he hadn't brought it up again we'd have all moved on to the next news item. Thanks Mark, and let's see how your case goes.

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

Dropped right after the election you say?

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 37 points 2 years ago (3 children)

"Calling the report reckless and defamatory" but not incorrect.

[–] chickenf622@sh.itjust.works 42 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Defamatory implies it's false

[–] imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

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

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

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.

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not in South Korea. Truth is not actually a defense to a defamation claim, wildly enough

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

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)

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 3 points 2 years ago

Yeah, IIRC the comment was deleted not long after the story came out about it, which is insanely odd timing if he's not the guy who left it.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 30 points 2 years ago

Wasn't CNN like crazy-careful about documentation, proof, and public records? Good luck, you weird racist MAGA pervert-freak...

[–] Late2TheParty@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago

Can't wait for whatever comes out in discovery.

[–] captain_samuel_brady@lemm.ee 25 points 2 years ago

It’s almost impossible to win a defamation lawsuit as a public person. This is just being used as a flimsy shield before the election to try to give his denials some credibility. The standard is so high that unless someone at CNN was recorded as admitting to making this up then this case won’t make it very far.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

That's foolish of him, because as defendants they now have standing to subpoena. He will be proven to be a weird fucking pervert in civil court.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago

His public comments are equally as disgusting.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 years ago

Oh look, North Carolina just happens to be one of the states with no anti-SLAPP laws on the books.

[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 9 points 2 years ago

Bet, lets move on to discovery.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

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.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ZeroCool@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

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

Not really. They came with the receipts, showing time after time that the commenter shared personal details and used indiosyncratic turns of phrase that Robinson repeated on public accounts and forums. They had a very reasonable belief that it was true, and never claimed more than that. In the US, for a public figure, that's generally more than enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Azamandriel@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Please, that's "Lt. Governor Black Nazi Dunderhead" to you.