Please disable your adblock and script blockers to view this page

Sarah Palin v. New York Times goes to trial - POLITICO - POLITICO


PAC
Times
The New York Times
the Supreme Court
Yale Law School
the Supreme Court —
Trump
the New York Legislature
Gawker
the Hogan-Gawker
Times’
the Cotton op-ed
Gallup
the Republican Party’s
Rakoff
the University of Maryland
behavior.”Rakoff
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Palin-Times
Ballard Spahr
POLITICO
POLITICO LLC


Sarah Palin

Josh Gerstein
John McCain
Gabrielle Giffords

Bruce Johnson
Floyd Abrams
Clarence Thomas
Neil Gorsuch
Sullivan
Donald Trump
Hulk Hogan
James Bennet
Michael Bennet
Tom Cotton
George Floyd
Rishika Dugyala
Jordan Cohen
Jed Rakoff
Liz Spayd
Shakespeare
Julius Caesar
Lucy Dalglish
Steve Scalise
Bill Clinton
Palin
’d


Democrats
American
country.“Social
Democratic
R
African American
Americans
Republican


Atlantic


Times’


Arizona
CopiedMore
Alaska
Tucson
Ariz.
New York City
Seattle
Florida
St. Petersburg
Fla.
Colorado
U.S.
Minneapolis
Palin
Alexandria
Va.

No matching tags

Positivity     41.00%   
   Negativity   59.00%
The New York Times
SOURCE: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/23/sarah-palin-new-york-times-00000541
Write a review: Politico
Summary

Link CopiedMore than a decade after Sarah Palin found herself roundly mocked by the nation’s media elite as a small-town rube during her stint as Sen. John McCain’s populist vice presidential running mate, the former Alaska governor has a chance this week to strike back in court at those she viewed as her tormentors.Palin is set to take on the colossus of the establishment press, The New York Times, in a libel suit she filed over a 2017 editorial that erroneously linked her political activities to the 2011 shooting attack in Tucson, Ariz., that left six people dead and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) badly wounded.Within a day, the Times corrected the editorial and noted that no connection was ever established between the rampage and a map that Palin’s political action committee circulated with crosshairs superimposed on the districts of 20 Democrats, including Giffords. The Times also acknowledged it erred by suggesting that the crosshairs appeared over images of the candidates themselves.But less than two weeks after the errant editorial ran, Palin filed suit against the Times, accusing the news outlet of defaming her.After years of litigation, as well as delays because of the coronavirus pandemic, a trial in Palin’s suit is scheduled to begin with jury selection on Monday in federal court in New York City.Some media advocates say the fact that the case is going to trial at all is a sign that almost a half-century of deference to the press in the courts is giving way to a more challenging legal landscape for journalists, media companies and their attorneys. And the political overtones in Palin’s case mean it may be hard for her team to convince a New York jury that the Times intentionally lied about the Alaska governor or acted recklessly enough to satisfy the actual malice standard.“In this case, you have a very prominent plaintiff who is suing in a city that I would say would not be her favorite place to be judged,” observed Abrams, who earlier in the case filed a friend-of-the-court brief for other news organizations backing the Times.Much of Palin’s case is expected to focus on the role of the Times’ editorial page editor at the time, James Bennet, who has admitted inserting into the editorial two phrases claiming a link between the Tucson shootings and Palin’s political map.Palin’s lawyers have argued that because Bennet edited another publication, The Atlantic, when it published an article making clear that no connection had been established between the Palin PAC’s crosshairs publication and the shooting, he must have known the claims were false. Palin’s attorneys did not respond to messages seeking comment.A Times spokesperson, Jordan Cohen, said the trial amounted to a test of whether news outlets can report on public figures without fear that a mistake will lead to a libel judgment.“In this trial we are seeking to reaffirm a foundational principle of American law: public figures should not be permitted to use libel suits to punish unintentional errors by news organizations,” Cohen said in a statement.“We published an editorial about an important topic that contained an inaccuracy.

As said here by