December 17, 2024 - 5:50pm
President-elect Donald Trump has sued ABC News for defamation over false comments anchor George Stephanopoulos made about the E. Jean Carroll case last March. Stephanopoulos repeatedly insisted that a jury found Trump “liable for rape”, when he’d actually been found liable for “sexual abuse” and not the specific charge of rape. Some might say this is splitting hairs, but it is the job of journalists to be precise. The network has settled for $15 million.
Trump’s lawyers faced an uphill battle to prove Stephanopoulos legally defamed him, but ABC had good reason to avoid prolonged litigation as a new administration enters Washington with the wind at its back and a renewed focus on fighting the media. Substantive examples of this anti-press push are beginning to stack up, some of which are fair, and others which are concerning.
Just last week, Republican Senator John Kennedy introduced a bill that would defund public media organisations such as NPR and PBS. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy may well pursue this with their Department of Government Efficiency. Brendan Carr, Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Communications Commission, recently confirmed that revoking broadcast licenses if networks fail to act “in the public interest” is “on the table” and that those licenses “are not sacred cows”. The President-elect himself has floated threats to revoke these licenses.
Inspector General Michael Horowitz published a report on 10 December which found that the Department of Justice improperly surveilled journalists during Trump’s first administration, as the Government sought to track down leaks. A small news outlet called 404 Media announced last week that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Trump ally, made the unfortunate decision to subpoena the site for its sources and methods in a case against Google.
On Tuesday, Senate Republicans blocked the bipartisan PRESS Act — a bill that would stop the Government from compelling journalists to name their sources — on the grounds that it threatened national security. Leaders in the GOP from Jim Jordan to Lindsey Graham have touted the bill for months as a hedge against the mistreatment of journalists such as Catherine Herridge. Trump came out against the legislation late last month, posting on Truth Social: “REPUBLICANS MUST KILL THIS BILL!” All signs point to a GOP which is somewhat hostile to the free press.
The greatest threat to press freedom involves egregiously dishonest journalists creating an atmosphere in which the public will tolerate encroachments on the First Amendment. Stephanopoulos may not have legally defamed Trump, but he needlessly disrespected ABC News viewers by being inaccurate. If Trump’s litigiousness “chills” purportedly neutral journalists from tossing around “facts” which are actually opinions, we’ll all be better off — including news outlets forced into doing their jobs properly.
NPR and PBS, though accused of bias, would survive DOGE’s cut recommendations with different funding streams, although that new funding could exacerbate any initial political sympathies. Carr is also right that broadcast licenses should be contingent on a network serving the public good, broadly defined. If the Republicans really pursue revoking licenses, we can adjudicate specific cases, but the threat is not that concerning in and of itself. The Government should always leave its enforcement duties “on the table”, even just as a last resort.
On the other hand, improperly snooping on journalists — even bad ones — and killing the PRESS Act in the name of “national security” is worrying. The same goes for Paxton’s subpoena. Trump, his incoming administration, and their outside allies should remember these are tools that can and will be used against smaller, Right-leaning alternative media by the Left should the GOP be careless and ideological about which organisations are targeted.
The PRESS Act isn’t a make-or-break case for the free media, but the GOP’s shift is curious. At one point, Republicans were proudly touting the bill as proof the party cared about embattled and legitimate journalists like Herridge. This is the proper route for the Right: Trump can save journalism by forcing reporters to live up to their own standards through reasonable and lawful methods while fighting heavy-handed censorship from corporations and Government. That might include some “retribution” along the lines of what Stephanopoulos experienced, long overdue cuts, and frank discussions about licensing.
It would not, however, be politically or morally tenable for Republicans to clamp down on media with which they merely disagree. The American media industry is vast: it includes some very powerful, bad-faith actors operating alongside some less powerful but fairer figures who actually have the big guys worried about their staying power. When it comes to the press, heavy-handedness from the incoming Trump administration could create more problems than it solves.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI think Emily gets this right. Trump should sue any media outlet he chooses for defamation – the bar is very high though. But blocking the PRESS Act is a bridge too far IMO. We need an independent media, even if they stink to high heaven.
“We need an independent media, even if they stink to high heaven.”
What’s independent again about billionaires, some of them foreign, most of them activists, owning critical organs of the state, like the organs of propaganda?
When an invading army conquers, one of the very first things it does it take control of the organs of propaganda. Why?
Independent is the operative term.
Since when has legacy media been independent?
Yes, democracy requires media checks and balances. These media that have not provided that should be censored.
Jim- I have not read this piece of legislation but most things Democrats are willing to sign off on contains unnecessary stipulations that give them more control or fund a pet cause unrelated to the actual law.
You might recall the “The Inflation Reduction Act” was actually a climate bill.
NPR in particular needs either to be defunded or forced to open itself up to diverse views. NPR as it stands now is a government-funded echo chamber for left-liberals who are unable to successfully set up alternatives to conservative radio.
I personally think that NPR and PBS should be defunded unless they remove all news coverage from their broadcasting. Why should they receive taxpayers money to serve as a mouthpiece for the democratic party. The fact is that their news is so biased their position is untenable. They have fallen a long way since the days of the McNeill-Leher news hour which was the most objective news/analysis program around.
I’m also of the belief that if the mainstream TV news stations (ABC, NBC, CNN, etc…) report stuff inaccurately and defame individuals they shoud be held accountable. While the bar for defamation cases in the US is extremely high, it is evident in the case of ABC that Stephanopoulos and ABCs behavior was so egregious that they knew they had to settle. If they hadn’t the damage would have been far greater.
“All signs point to a GOP which is somewhat hostile to the free press.”
What a wussy statement. And false too. There are no signs that the GOP is at all hostile to a free press. There are signs that a few Republicans have taken actions to rein in an out-of-control media. I read the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal every day. They read like Pravda, attacking Donald Trump as the enemy of the state. No wonder he balks at giving them even more protection. But all in the GOP remain stalwart in promoting First Amendment freedoms, particularly as compared to the Democrats.
Donald Trump’s latest suit against Anne Selzer has nothing to do with hostility to press freedom. She was called the most reliable pollster in the country, and then she comes out the Saturday before the election with poll results that claim Kamala Harris has a three-point lead over Donald Trump. The election held three days later Donald Trump wins by 13 points, meaning she was off by 16 points. No wonder Donald Trump smells a rat. I do too.
UPDATE: I did some more looking into this case and am now of the opinion that Disney (ABC News’s parent) was wise to settle the case. The judge had ordered the parties to proceed with discovery, and in particular for both George Stephanopoulos and Donald Trump to answer questions in depositions.
That decision prompted the Disney lawyers to offer a settlement that very day, and they quickly agreed on one with Donald Trump’s lawyers before the day was over. To me, that means the Disney side had something very damaging they needed to hide. Probably some text or email that blew the case wide open. That happens, a lot.
The big problem that George Stephanopoulos had was that he used the word “rape” 12 times in his interview with Nancy Mace, saying that the jury had found Donald Trump liable for rape just like Nancy Mace had been raped. But the jury had instead found that Donald Trump was NOT liable for rape. The jury verdict form asked them to find whether he had committed rape, sexual abuse, and/or forcible touching, and they found he had committed the latter two but not rape.
George Stephanopoulos knew that the jury had found Donald Trump not liable for rape. After the jury verdict he had interviewed Jean Carroll on the air and they had discussed the fact that the jury had found that Donald Trump was not liable for rape. So when George Stephanopoulos said Donald Trump was liable for rape, he knew that was a lie, but said it anyway. Stupidly.
I’m sure there was a discussion between George Stephanopoulos and Disney’s lawyers after Donald Trump asked for a retraction and an apology and they told him to pound sand. Those discussions should be done orally only, but something damaging from those talks must have made its way into printed form. That mistake cost Disney $16 million and a lot of hurt. I hope they take the money out of George Stephanopoulos’s salary, and punish him for the hurt.
It’s not simply that for her state Iowa, Selzer predicted +3 for Harris 3 days before the election. It’s that Iowa is a deep red state and Trump had been leading prior by over +10. If Harris was really ahead in Iowa, it would have meant a landslide victory for Harris in the electoral college on a scale of Reagan vs Mondale. Yes Trump is absolutely right to smell a rat and infer election interference.
Good point. I can’t imagine what Anne Selzer was thinking. She had to have known the numbers were bogus. She’s not stupid.
but maybe suffering from TDS?
This is redefining election interference in a dangerous way. Even if we posit that Selzer cooked the numbers (and there is no evidence for this at present), is that illegal? Then couldn’t Trump claiming that he had an “unprecedented mandate” with 49.5% of the popular vote be illegal too?
The media have behaved as democrat rabid attack dogs for years. Payback is more than warranted, especially if it can enshrine the value of neutrality into survivors.
Not destroying some media would be a major failure, it would send democrats the signal that weaponization of public institutions is OK, and at worst you gt a slap on the wrist if election changes majority.
Trump needs to collect a few scalps.
This is more in line with Trump’s style and personality than anything I’ve read in days. Wave your arms around, make threats, knock some sense into the mob. None of the injuries will even draw blood.
I understand there’s an British phrase for what he’s doing: “Putting some stick about”. And who can blame him?
Once he gets all the cattle facing in the right direction we will (hopefully) see what he intends to do with his second term.
The bulk of the main stream media in the USA have been anti Trump for years – not only as editorial comment but also in what they choose to report and what they choose to ignore.
So clearly ‘they’ have not been independent. Unless the MSM recognise and apologise for this bias they will deserve any criticism that comes their way. It might be a step too far to regulate them… but only if they don’t continue to be the propaganda arm of a political party in the future.
Folks, including the great majority of journalists, still are clueless that Trump’s modus operandi is “always transactional” and he is always negotiating. He did the right thing and won with ABC, and it will be interesting to see if he is successful with other media outlets. I hope so, they deserve it. I would bet the ranch he won’t be clamping down on First Amendment rights like the Dems and Repubs have been doing since 9/11. However, I think the folks who broke the law will be held accountable to some degree and that will be a great place to start.
NPR and PBS are interesting. The way to effect change is fire all of the upper management and start over. Vet the other folks and fire them if they can’t commit to being non partisan. McNeil Lehrer was a great program and with the right management changes, both PBS and NPR will be what are supposed to be.
Firing the first 3 levels of management in every department or agency should be the goal. We will see.
ABC deserved to be sued. That woman Carroll was a fantasist
Her grift will end the way most grifts end.
While I believe Trump should definitely not get involved in censoring any news outlet, I also think the American people should not be involved in funding TDS fringe left echo chambers like NPR with their tax dollars.
If media gets back to its “just the facts” reporting and leave spin to clearly delineated editorial pages or announcements (anyone remember WPIX news in NYC 10 pm broadcast?), them maybe Trump can leave it alone.
Until then defund NPR and public TV and scrutinize every broadcast license in existence.
Journalism used to be a blue-collar profession, a man in a trench coat and fedora, probably smoking a cigarette, learned his trade “on the job”, carried water for nobody, told the truth as he saw it. The new white-collar “journalists” don’t measure up, educated in elite colleges, wearing a fancy suit, carry water for the powerful and well-connected.
Not one word about the party that actually i.poses and supports censorship and spying: democrats. Not one word about the network that regularly employees deep state liars to push narratives:CNN. Just more sanctimonious warnings for Republicans to stfu and take it.
NPR and PBS are the Pravda and Izvestia of the democrat party. Parasites sucking on the teat of the tax payer. They should be defunded, their “trusts” reallocated to actual needs. There is nothing “free” about a party controlled state funded media.