Arrest the NBC reporter!

[Foxfyre]

For altering the Trayvon audio tape. He intentionally omitted the 9-11 operator asking Zimmerman what race Trayvon was to make it sound like Zimmerman is a racist. This is the equivalent of yelling fire in a theatre in my opinion. The leftist dominated media have absolutely no shame or morals, they tried and convicted Zimmerman on the airwaves. Of course now we realize there is much more to the story, not that it wasn't obvious from the beginning.

Unfortunately for all of us, Corporations faught for and won the right to lie. Thank Fox News and Nike for this.

Now Corporations Claim The "Right To Lie"

So you don't understand the difference between commercial speech and the press.

Not surprising, considering the fact that you find commondreams.org a worthwhile source.

Not to mention that he doesn't seem to have a good sense of what the topic is.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

 

[California Girl]

And I showed you that the courts ruled that Fox News can lie. So you may know the difference difference between the press and commercial speech, but that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong in your assumption.

What was your point in showing the difference between the press and commercial speech? Are you saying that the press can not lie?

Its so hard to debate with you righties because you say things that don't matter and think you proved something.

I'm showing that your precious little commondreams article doesn't prove what you think it does, dipshit.

And, I'm not a "rightie."

The courts didn't rule that Fox has the right to lie?

No.... the courts rules that the media (not just Fox) have the right to control their own content. But please, don't let reality interfere with your hyperbole.

 

[Crackerjack]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

 

[California Girl]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

There's a whole heap of potential lawsuits bubbling.... NBC is just one.

 

[Crackerjack]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

There's a whole heap of potential lawsuits bubbling.... NBC is just one.

Oh definitely. He's going to keep some lucky plaintiff's attorney busy for a decade.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

But he would have to be able to prove intent. "Absence of malice" is a protection for the press if what they report turns out to be erroneous to the detriment of somebody. And all NBC has to say is "oops, sorry. Inadvertent error" and they also have a case. Zimmerman might prevail, but he is already having trouble coming up with funds for his legal bills. And it is unlikely any attorney would take a suit against NBC pro bono or on a Zimmerman pays only if he wins basis. With the full force and power of NBC's money and legal team on their side, it would be a long, expensive, and very difficult case to win.

 

[Katzndogz]

Liberals aren't troubled by facts. There are liberals today who believe that the Duke Lacrosse players should be in prison. No one is troubled that the police officer that Al Sharpton lied about in the Twana Brawley case didn't get him job back and his life is still ruined.

If the evidence shows that Zimmerman was attacked, he should still go to prison because there's still a dead kid. Zimmerman was wrong because he didin't lay there and take the beating Trayvon was dishing out. That's what he was supposed to do to prove he isn't racist.

 

[Crackerjack]

There is no law against sloppy or dishonest reporting unless it incites to riot or something as extreme as that. There are laws against slander and libel and that is where Zimmerman could have a case when a news organization knowingly puts out a false impression intended to smear him and make him look guilty.

But it is so difficult to prove 'intent of malice' where the press is concerned. And that is why the public should demand ethical standards and a return to a code of integrity in reporting that all reputable media sources once did their damndest to live up to.

It would be wonderful to have an education system that educated instead of indoctrinates again. And it would be wonderful to be able to watch the evening news or read the morning paper, again, and know that every story was cross checked, verified, and is as accurate as the medium can make it.

What NBC did to Zimmerman should not be tolerable to any honorable person.

It is a sad day when the National Enquiror is more reliable than NBC.

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

But he would have to be able to prove intent. "Absence of malice" is a protection for the press if what they report turns out to be erroneous to the detriment of somebody. And all NBC has to say is "oops, sorry. Inadvertent error" and they also have a case. Zimmerman might prevail, but he is already having trouble coming up with funds for his legal bills. And it is unlikely any attorney would take a suit against NBC pro bono or on a Zimmerman pays only if he wins basis. With the full force and power of NBC's money and legal team on their side, it would be a long, expensive, and very difficult case to win.

It depends a lot upon what turns up at discovery, but I agree, it will probably be difficult. However, there is always going to be an attorney out there who is just looking for something like this to make his bones and will work for cheap just for the chance to add this to his résumé. I would be shocked if Zimmerman's parents haven't been already bombarded by attorneys willing to take the case for him against NBC.

What I suspect is the most likely outcome of such a case is for NBC to settle out of court just to make it go away.

 

[Foxfyre]

See, that's the thing -- I think Zimmerman should go after NBC in some sort of defamation action. If it can be proven that the producer at NBC acted with malice, they ought to have to write Zimmerman a hefty check, not only in an effort to compensate him for the attack on his character, but also as a warning to others.

But he would have to be able to prove intent. "Absence of malice" is a protection for the press if what they report turns out to be erroneous to the detriment of somebody. And all NBC has to say is "oops, sorry. Inadvertent error" and they also have a case. Zimmerman might prevail, but he is already having trouble coming up with funds for his legal bills. And it is unlikely any attorney would take a suit against NBC pro bono or on a Zimmerman pays only if he wins basis. With the full force and power of NBC's money and legal team on their side, it would be a long, expensive, and very difficult case to win.

It depends a lot upon what turns up at discovery, but I agree, it will probably be difficult. However, there is always going to be an attorney out there who is just looking for something like this to make his bones and will work for cheap just for the chance to add this to his résumé. I would be shocked if Zimmerman's parents haven't been already bombarded by attorneys willing to take the case for him against NBC.

What I suspect is the most likely outcome of such a case is for NBC to settle out of court just to make it go away.

I would agree if NBC gave a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. The fact that they have tolerated the absolutely disgusting tripe put out by their subsidiary, MSNBC, all these years tells me they don't give a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. But if they thought there was a chance they would lose a libel/slander case--both would apply in this situation--they might settle out of court. But I'm pretty sure they know they would have a 99% chance of prevailing on an 'absence of malice' defense.

 

[Crackerjack]

But he would have to be able to prove intent. "Absence of malice" is a protection for the press if what they report turns out to be erroneous to the detriment of somebody. And all NBC has to say is "oops, sorry. Inadvertent error" and they also have a case. Zimmerman might prevail, but he is already having trouble coming up with funds for his legal bills. And it is unlikely any attorney would take a suit against NBC pro bono or on a Zimmerman pays only if he wins basis. With the full force and power of NBC's money and legal team on their side, it would be a long, expensive, and very difficult case to win.

It depends a lot upon what turns up at discovery, but I agree, it will probably be difficult. However, there is always going to be an attorney out there who is just looking for something like this to make his bones and will work for cheap just for the chance to add this to his résumé. I would be shocked if Zimmerman's parents haven't been already bombarded by attorneys willing to take the case for him against NBC.

What I suspect is the most likely outcome of such a case is for NBC to settle out of court just to make it go away.

I would agree if NBC gave a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. The fact that they have tolerated the absolutely disgusting tripe put out by their subsidiary, MSNBC, all these years tells me they don't give a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. But if they thought there was a chance they would lose a libel/slander case--both would apply in this situation--they might settle out of court. But I'm pretty sure they know they would have a 99% chance of prevailing on an 'absence of malice' defense.

Fair enough, I wouldn't be surprised if it happens as you describe. Either way, it should be interesting to see what happens.

To be honest, I haven't watched news on television for years (with the sole exception of Headline News, and only in order to ogle Robin Meade), unless I'm stuck in a hotel room somewhere out on business and there's nothing else on. Most of it is so bad it's insulting, and I have remarkably low standards when it comes to television.

 

[Foxfyre]

It depends a lot upon what turns up at discovery, but I agree, it will probably be difficult. However, there is always going to be an attorney out there who is just looking for something like this to make his bones and will work for cheap just for the chance to add this to his résumé. I would be shocked if Zimmerman's parents haven't been already bombarded by attorneys willing to take the case for him against NBC.

What I suspect is the most likely outcome of such a case is for NBC to settle out of court just to make it go away.

I would agree if NBC gave a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. The fact that they have tolerated the absolutely disgusting tripe put out by their subsidiary, MSNBC, all these years tells me they don't give a flying flip about journalistic integrity or the reputation of the network. But if they thought there was a chance they would lose a libel/slander case--both would apply in this situation--they might settle out of court. But I'm pretty sure they know they would have a 99% chance of prevailing on an 'absence of malice' defense.

Fair enough, I wouldn't be surprised if it happens as you describe. Either way, it should be interesting to see what happens.

To be honest, I haven't watched news on television for years (with the sole exception of Headline News, and only in order to ogle Robin Meade), unless I'm stuck in a hotel room somewhere out on business and there's nothing else on. Most of it is so bad it's insulting, and I have remarkably low standards when it comes to television.

The reason Fox News has been so overwhelming successful, consistently and almost without fail netting ratings that exceed ALL the other cable news networks combined and lately they've been giving the big three free network news a run for their money too, is because they are the closest thing we'll find to a balanced news source. I won't say they are unbiased because they clearly are not. But dishonestly biased they are not. And you will get both sides of a story on any subject there.

Fox errs as much as any other news source in reporting sketchy details as news stories are developing--they all do it and I hate that with a passion--but they do keep cleaning up the details until they get it as right as they can get it. And they don't sugar coat it regardless of which side of the aisle somebody is on. Their coverage of Mike Wallace has been exemplary.

The only way we are ever going to restore the media as the honorable profession it once was is by making our disgust known when they get it wrong and then refuse to boost their ratings. Ratings are a powerful weapon and that is how we so often get the media we deserve.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I don't know. I know that so far the media reporting hasn't been too accurate or non biased. I haven't heard Zimmerman's lawyer say that and I don't have too much confidence that most of the media is interested in staying impartial or being accurate in this matter. So who knows for sure what Zimmerman's lawyer said?

The crazy thing about this is that you're getting 100% of your information from the media.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The NBPP has put out a bounty on his life

Liar. They put a bounty on his capture. They are calling for Zimmerman's arrest, not his death.

NBC already fired the producer of the segment, so their culpability is also obvious.

His work was not up to their quality standards, and they fired him. Pretty standard employment practices to me. I see nothing more.

 

[The T]

And I showed you that the courts ruled that Fox News can lie. So you may know the difference difference between the press and commercial speech, but that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong in your assumption.

What was your point in showing the difference between the press and commercial speech? Are you saying that the press can not lie?

Its so hard to debate with you righties because you say things that don't matter and think you proved something.

I'm showing that your precious little commondreams article doesn't prove what you think it does, dipshit.

And, I'm not a "rightie."

The courts didn't rule that Fox has the right to lie?

Has the First Amendment been struck down?

 

[AmericanFirst]

For altering the Trayvon audio tape. He intentionally omitted the 9-11 operator asking Zimmerman what race Trayvon was to make it sound like Zimmerman is a racist. This is the equivalent of yelling fire in a theatre in my opinion. The leftist dominated media have absolutely no shame or morals, they tried and convicted Zimmerman on the airwaves. Of course now we realize there is much more to the story, not that it wasn't obvious from the beginning.

You can bet the obamaturd supporting media will skew the facts to make zimmerman look guilty of murder and martin an angel.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know. I know that so far the media reporting hasn't been too accurate or non biased. I haven't heard Zimmerman's lawyer say that and I don't have too much confidence that most of the media is interested in staying impartial or being accurate in this matter. So who knows for sure what Zimmerman's lawyer said?

The crazy thing about this is that you're getting 100% of your information from the media.

Yes I am, except for what little bit of additional information is dug up by internet sleuths, Facebook.Twitter bloggers, and real investigator writers who are working independently from the mainstream media. And I am looking at all of it, the pros and cons, the contradictiions and the inconsistencies, and after awhile the blatant raciism driving a whole lot of it becomes more and more obvious.

But because I am unwilling to be spoonfed the information by a few favored politically correct ideologically biased sources, I am quite convinced that nobody posting on this thread knows whether George Zimmerman is innocent of any wrong doing or is guilty of causing a terrible wrongful death. I don't know. And you don't know.

So it doesn't take long for people interested in the truth to figure out those who have already tried, convicted, and sentenced George Zimmerman are doing so not of out any reasoned or logical evidence, but purely because they want him to be guilty.

And my sense of ethics, that is wrong/

 

[Inthemiddle]

Yes I am, except for what little bit of additional information is dug up by internet sleuths, Facebook.Twitter bloggers, and real investigator writers who are working independently from the mainstream media. And I am looking at all of it, the pros and cons, the contradictiions and the inconsistencies, and after awhile the blatant raciism driving a whole lot of it becomes more and more obvious.

But because I am unwilling to be spoonfed the information by a few favored politically correct ideologically biased sources, I am quite convinced that nobody posting on this thread knows whether George Zimmerman is innocent of any wrong doing or is guilty of causing a terrible wrongful death. I don't know. And you don't know.

So it doesn't take long for people interested in the truth to figure out those who have already tried, convicted, and sentenced George Zimmerman are doing so not of out any reasoned or logical evidence, but purely because they want him to be guilty.

And my sense of ethics, that is wrong/

Oh, for crying out loud. Multiple reputable news outlets have reported that Zimmeran's lawyers have publicly stated that according to George, the word was punks. Either I can believe that this is what the lawyers have said. Or I can believe that there's some massive racist-based conspiracy that finds it very important to make the public believe that the lawyers said that, even if they actually didn't.

I'm glad for one thing, though. For a second, I thought you were about to babble on with some grandiose self righteous BS about how you are the only person in the world who has been listening to all the information coming out and that your conclusions alone are the only ones well reasoned to determine what parts of the reporting are accurate and which parts are part of the big conspiracy of misinformation.

 

[GoneBezerk]

You are so fucking stupid.

IT IS ILLEGAL TO KIDNAP SOMEONE.

But we know what the Black Pussies are really up to....killing him, just like you.

The NBPP has put out a bounty on his life

Liar. They put a bounty on his capture. They are calling for Zimmerman's arrest, not his death.

NBC already fired the producer of the segment, so their culpability is also obvious.

His work was not up to their quality standards, and they fired him. Pretty standard employment practices to me. I see nothing more.

 

[bripat9643]

The NBPP has put out a bounty on his life

Liar. They put a bounty on his capture. They are calling for Zimmerman's arrest, not his death.

They said they wanted him "dead or alive."

NBC already fired the producer of the segment, so their culpability is also obvious.

His work was not up to their quality standards, and they fired him. Pretty standard employment practices to me. I see nothing more.

Yeah, it was "not up to their standard" because he got caught lying. They only want people who don't get caught.

It's standard practice to fire employees who expose a corporation to a massive lawsuit for slander and reckless endangerment.