this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
330 points (98.8% liked)

News

23151 readers
3462 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.


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


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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 1 year 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
[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 33 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Well… discovery should at least be entertaining.

[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 12 points 11 hours ago

Seriously...does he not know that is part of the process? And to defend it they'll dig up everything and more to produce as evidence.

Problem is, it'll likely be silently settled and we'll never hear about it again and he can just lie and say he won or some shit.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 26 points 15 hours ago

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

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 70 points 19 hours 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 17 points 16 hours 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.

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 159 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Ooooh. Discovery, you say?

Bet that will unearth even more Nazi/Porn weirdness.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 76 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

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.

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 22 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 16 points 19 hours ago

You can counter sue, so we kind of have that system.

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 17 hours ago

His biggest problem is North Carolina has a big Dixiecrat/ Republican base. He was getting a pass due to having a R next to his name. Now, they will vote for a white guy.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago

Possibly, but I could also see WB countersuing. They really don't have much to lose there.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 19 points 20 hours ago

"Hi, Comcast? Yeah, as far back as you got em."

"Hey, Google? Yep, thanks bro."

"Hey pornhub. Yeah, everything these IPs ever touched. Thanks."

🍿

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 17 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 15 points 19 hours ago

I assume a company like CNN has a law firm on retainer who is being paid whether or not they're needed.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 18 points 15 hours 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 12 points 16 hours ago

His public comments are equally as disgusting.

[–] captain_samuel_brady@lemm.ee 24 points 19 hours 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.

[–] cybervseas@lemmy.world 56 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 19 points 21 hours 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 4 points 20 hours ago

Dropped right after the election you say?

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 37 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

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

[–] chickenf622@sh.itjust.works 41 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Defamatory implies it's false

[–] imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works 15 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours 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 11 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours 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 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours 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 16 points 21 hours 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 2 points 19 hours 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.

[–] Late2TheParty@lemmy.world 29 points 21 hours ago

Can't wait for whatever comes out in discovery.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 9 points 19 hours ago

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

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 21 hours 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.

[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 9 points 21 hours ago

Bet, lets move on to discovery.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 7 points 21 hours 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 16 points 21 hours 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.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 11 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

i'd venture to guess they wouldn't publish something like this without some pretty ironclad "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof it was him

[–] Addv4@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago

Its pretty obvious. They use the idea of reasonable doubt in the investigation, but then point out specific instances of him basically saying the same thing on both Twitter and Nude Africa, using terms of phrase that are very uncommon, generally on the same day. It was pretty damning.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 21 hours 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 20 hours 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.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Whether he wins or loses in November

NC went to trump in 2020, but had also reelected cooper (D) for governor. robinson's been polling at 40% or below against stein's >50%, so it's looking pretty grim for black nazi

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 3 points 19 hours ago

This is an unfortunate tradition of having a Democrat governor but Republican for NC Congress and higher. It's no indicator of any potential. However, I do think we have another chance to do 2008 again, despite all the work the GOP has put into preventing more voters.

[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours 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.

[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

Either way someone’s getting that doo-doo feces thrown all over the walls, the floor, the ceiling, and it will stink so bad

load more comments
view more: next ›