The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
By now the basic story is too well known to require extensive recapitulation. NBC News committed grievous and unprofessional reporting when it took this conversation involving George Zimmerman,
"This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about."
The 911 officer responded saying, "OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?"
Which it then turned into this:
“This guy looks like he's up to no good … he looks black."
For which NBC then apologized in a news release to its viewers:
During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers
Here is my free advice to NBC. First, hire a lawyer to negotiate a handsome settlement in a libel case. Second, fire the people who are responsible for the perverse apology, which only compounds the original mistake.
Let me take these one at a time:
First, the abbreviated statement is clear defamation by the standard definition that covers false statement of facts intended to damage the reputation of the plaintiff. It is not that the words quoted are false. It is worse than that. They were quoted out of context to give them the opposite appearance of their obvious and intended meaning. The quotation shows a report, followed by an inquiry, followed by an answer that was truncated to make it appear that Martin was followed because he was black. Those willful and knowing changes meet the most exacting standard of actual malice that could be raised against a media defendant. They are sufficient to support claims for actual and punitive damages.
The apology makes it worse. The first point to note is that the apology was not a correction of the mistake. If NBC were to make an actual correction of the mistake, it would have to put out the full version of the story and correct the earlier misimpression. Second, the correction would have to be made in the same way and with the same level of attention of the original story. Put otherwise, it would have to be put on the air with the same level of publicity and the original report.
Next, any correction has to be truthful. This feeble pabulum was not. No, there was not some “error” in production for which there are always some (weak) excuses. This was a deliberate fabrication that did, and was intended to, fan the flames of racial discord. In my view, the evasive, incomplete, and underpublicized “apology” aggravates the original libel by refusing to acknowledge NBC’s internal breakdown in basic news decorum.
The betting here is that NBC News will not have the courage to come clean. For an organization that lives by its own (tattered) reputation, it should take my free advice: make a clean breast of the situation right now before the scandal grows.
- Comment (29)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Nov '10
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
EJHill
Jim Bell, who is the Executive producer of Todayis still employed. The New York Timesreports, and others confirmed, it was a producer at the NBC Bureau in Miami that made the edit and has been fired. · 9 hours ago
Quite right EJ, I read too quickly. That it is an unnamed producer (at the point of announcement, at least) onlyreinforces to me the impression that this person is a sacrificial lamb. I wonder, how is aproducer not important enough to be named? NBC is still characterizing the matter as amistake. Why fire the man? Is a mistake, even such a serious one, not a matter ofinternal discipline? Seems their actions belie their words.
May '10
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
Remember the ESPN/Jeremy Linn fiasco? When they fired the person responsible they, too, refused to name names. That's the default position - you don't talk about personnel decisions.
Edited on April 7, 2012 at 5:43pmOct '10
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
Sickening. The fired editor should be identified as should the others who touched the decision.
Mar '11
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
Tommy De Seno: In a civil suit Zimmerman would have to subject himself to a deposition.
That's the last thing in the world his criminal defense team wants right now.
Not sure of the Statute of Limitations for defamation in Florida, but in NJ it is 1 year. The problem presented is if Zimmerman does get charged that proceeding will take more than a year. · 8 hours ago
I would think that the statute of limitations on the civil cause doesn't begin to run until after the criminal prosecution ends.
May '11
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
Fat Dave
Tommy De Seno: In a civil suit Zimmerman would have to subject himself to a deposition.
That's the last thing in the world his criminal defense team wants right now.
Not sure of the Statute of Limitations for defamation in Florida, but in NJ it is 1 year. The problem presented is if Zimmerman does get charged that proceeding will take more than a year. · 8 hours ago
I would think that the statute of limitations on the civil cause doesn't begin to run until after the criminal prosecution ends. · 5 hours ago
That might seem to make sense, but sadly it generally isn't the case.
Feb '12
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
A good general rule is that if the person to blame isn't named, you should blame his boss instead. The buck stops there, and unless the boss is willing and able to show that it's someone else's fault, it's his fault. So I'd include Mr. Bell in the defamation claim, personally. Otherwise, the easy way out is to fire a flunky while promising to rehire him in six months and giving him a nice bit of severance pay while he's on his 6-month vacation.
This is an example of how thinking like a game theorist helps. Ask yourself how NBC, Bell, and the flunky can jointly arrange things given their private information so as to maximize the sum of their payoffs and then divide them.
Also using game theory, to throw a wrench in: Mr. Flunky, if you're reading this, realize that if this is what happens, you can blackmail NBC. At the end of the 6 months, hold out for a million dollars, not just your old job back---- or you spill the beans to Breitbart's outfit.
Feb '12
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
There are lots of interesting legal angles here. Maybe some good exam questions for the Epstein torts casebook, if you're still doing it.
1. NBC is liable on respondeat superior, I suppose, for compensatory damages. How about punitive damages? Has their mediocre apology increased their liability for punitive damages.
2. Since this is malicious, am I right that the Miami producer is also personally liable? NBC is liable too, by respondeat superior, but can NBC claim compensation from the producer for whatever damages NBC has to pay out?
3. Is there any reason Zimmerman should include the Miami producer as a defendant in his defamation action? Or should he restrict himself to suing NBC, which has deeper pockets and is easier to collect judgements from.
Feb '12
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
On the statute of limitations question, would this work as a Zimmerman strategy?
He waits until just before the statute of limitations runs out, and files his defamation claim. Civil suits take years to come to trial, much longer than criminal cases, and he delays so if he's deposed, it will be too late for the criminal case. In any case, he delays discovery as long as he can by fussing over things like federal vs. state court, refiling his pleadings, and so forth. He must also try to accelerate the criminal case, so he's cleared soon. Is there any way for him to get a declaratory judgement on his criminal guilt, if the prosecutors try to keep him dangling?
Feb '11
Re: The NBC NonApology to George Zimmerman
I would like to see the fired guy get asked - in an interview or better, on the witness stand - what he saw at NBC that gave him the idea that this kind of vicious editing is what NBC would want.