Why don’t you explain what happened as you know it? I’d be curious to see if the facts are the same but the interpretation is different.
Thank you in advance.
And I’ve heard the settlement was a piece of used gum in a foil wrapper. My opinion is just as valid.
Since terms of the settlement are confidential we really don’t know. It seems unlikely that CNN capitulated and coughed up the nine figure demand of Sandmann’s attorney. If they did, or even if they settled for several million, I would think that would show as some sort of increased expense on CNN’s financial reports.
But, as CNN is owned by TBS, TBS owned by WarnerMedia, and WM by AT&T, I seriously doubt that even a sizable settlement couldn’t be obfuscated by multiple layers of accounting tricks.
So, we won’t really know. My guess, and it is just a guess, is a low six figures number that is mostly eaten up by lawyer’s fees leaving Sandmann enough to maybe buy himself a nice new MAGA hat.
Wow. 25 million, if true, could be a watershed moment in the industry like the way the Richard Jewell lawsuits were over two decades ago. I find that figure dubiously high to believe, but hope it’s close.
That prize fucker Alex Jones only had to pay $100,000 for calling a guy with a murdered son a liar - if Sandmann got more than that, there’s something seriously awry with the world
Dean Wormfood.
That wasn’t a settlement though. I don’t think they’ve went to trial yet.
And this is important: anyone who is up in arms about how Sandmann was treated but not about how Alex Jones acted is not really concerned about media accuracy.
I find the $25 million number hard to believe (not impossible, but very unlikely)
Despite popular misconceptions, corporations don’t shell out that kind of money without a huge fight and compelling reasons. I’ve had corporations desperate to settle cases (one where an employee did something quite terrible to a customer and they really wanted the case to go away before a lawsuit was filed) and cases where the plaintiff was terribly injured. Most never reach $5,000,000 or $10,000,000.
If the defendant in this case thought they had exposure and wanted the shut it down, they would have started negotiations much lower. To get ot $25M, the plaintiff would have had to turn down $500,000, then $1M, $2M, and $5M. Would you young man really turn down $5 million if offered? It seems unlikely. Would he have turned down $10,000,000? It seems almost impossible.
I wonder what percentage of any settlement goes to the snowflake’s attorney.
Somewhere in the 33.33% to 40% range.
The point being his supporters here seem to be ignoring that he has to pay attorney fees out of any settlement. 
Can you imagine a grown adult getting this worked up over a teenager??
Oh wait…this isn’t the Greta Thunberg thread? My bad.
Is “I’d love to punch him in his smug smirking face” still the password? Someone should change that.
25 million sounds really high. I was thinking more like 1 or 2 million with an apology for vilifying a minor. But depending on where the trial would have been docketed, you could lose pretty big.
CNN did not vilify a minor and there does not appear to be an apology forthcoming. The settlement did not include a formal apology, an admission of wrongdoing, or even a retraction.
One million is unlikely. Twenty-five million is plainly ridiculous.
Of course they vilified a minor.
The OP called this child “Smirky McDouchbag”
Did the CNN photo have anything to do with that characterization?
Was it a fair portrayal of this kid when put in context?
Did CNN not have access to that context when they put this picture of a kid out there making him look like a Smirky McDouchebag?
People in this thread have commented (like CNN host Reza Alsan) how this child had a punchable face. For shame.
He has received death threats and threats of physical violence based on that photo that makes him look disrespectful and antagonistic. He’s a 16 year old receiving death threats not because of what he did or said but because of how CNN portrayed him.
Celebrities have called for him (along with other students) to be “named, shamed, doxxed and expelled” They should be ashamed
He’s a 16 year old kid. If someone said that Greta Thunberg had a punchable face, this place would go apeshit about advocating violence against a minor, and rightly so.
But when a CNN host says that this 16 year old kid has a punchable face and he starts receiving death threats, people here act like he might deserve it for wearing a fucking hat. We don’t condemn 16 year old kids based on their views, we may dismiss them as being young, naive and inexperienced but we do not condemn them based on a photo taken out of context, like CNN did.
CNN made him a political target and defamed him by portraying him as something he is not. Almost 50 celebrities and politicians condemned this 16 year old child based on this photo, including representatives of the catholic church (Smirky McDouchebag with the 16 year old punchable face was there for a pro-life rally with the other kids from covintgon catholic high school).
By his own words Nathan Phillips says that he was deliberately crowding the kids to push them back. Even if we believe him when he says he was trying to defuse a situation that was brewing between the kids and the black israelites. It is clear Phillips went to the kids and and pushed his way through them, they did not surround him he drove himself into their midst. He got in the kid’s face with a drum (in the hopes of driving him back) and by omitting that context and putting up a particularly bad looking picture of the incident, they defamed him with a libelous photo of him smirking.
They did not settle this case for tens or even a few hundred thousand dollars. There is too much partisan money pushing the case against CNN for this to settle for peanuts.IMO, CNN is clearly in the wrong here (particularly Rezla Aslan’s punchable face comment), and that is why I think anything less than a million dollars seems unlikely
Don’t tel me you find the intellectual dishonesty, the denial of obvious reality and hypocrisy surprising. It’s a core feature.
Bullshit.
And a Reza Aslan Tweet is not something CNN is responsible for.
What on earth does this mean? This is contingency-fee litigation. There is no need for outside money to “push the case.”
This place used to be different.