I’m going to need some references. I know what “sick and tired” is.
2 Likes
I have no idea what you’re on about. I don’t have the power (or the inclination) to ban you, and I never brought up either woke speak or cancel culture.
2 Likes
The subject at hand…
4 Likes
Ok. I’ll play your game.
Define “differently intelligenced” for the rest of the board. I already know what you meant but apparently nobody else did.
This is the correct take.
1 Like
I have no desire to engage with you further, so no.
1 Like
Typical.
Please note that this post was edited by a moderator. This is Not my complete reply.
Got it from the cache and a handful of other “media” that cited and quoted NYT. Read the whole thing. Not journalism, just narrative.
And the “damaged” thing?
Nucleotides, not amino acids.
Big difference.
Negligence counts as malice. The article makes an interesting point that PR may overrule right in deciding whether to sue.
Interestingly, NYT specifically has lost a number of libel suits and paid damages.
ETA: I now know more about denaturation of DNA than necessary. Took five minutes. Poor fact-checking by NYT. Makes me wonder about the unnamed “lab” who didn’t point out to their NYT customer that the DNA test would not yield meaningful results.
DNA testing costs are surprisingly low - $150 to $500US.
I think the odds of Subway suing the NYT over the article (which they would have to prove is both false and injurious, and I can’t see how it’s either) are roughly on par with the NJ DOE suing you over repeatedly insisting that “There is no science in New Jersey.”
I took a quick cruise around the internet to look for libel suits that the NYT lost and couldn’t find any. Care to provide a link or two?
1 Like
“False” includes negligent and I think that’s easy - not noting that high heat processing like commercial canning denaturizes (destroys) DNA. Defamation on the basis of NYT click data and the number of republications in other media goes to injury.
‘NYT libel suit lost damage’ is dominated by NYT v. Sullivan and Mr. Trumps failed suit. You have to get many pages into results to find anything.
The Supreme Court ruled (unanimously) in favor of the NYT in the Sullivan suit.
And the Trump defamation suit was dismissed.
So! Where are the cases the Times lost, again? For a guy who likes to ask other people for citations/references/footnotes, you seem oddly unwilling to provide any of your own. And I’m genuinely interested, since I can’t find any lost libel suits myself.
1 Like
Agree on NYT v. Sullivan and Trump v. NYT. NYT v. Sullivan is seminal and set the bar for higher standards to prove libel against media (I don’t agree that should be, or that post-journalism NYT qualifies as media anymore but the Court gives them a pass). Trump v. NYT was just stupid posturing with no ground. Opinions, even stupid ones, are protected speech. Note the recent cheerleader case (Mahanoy School District v. B.L.) in which stupid speech even by a minor was protected. Those dominate search engine returns. I’ll take another pass and find the returns that jumped out at me. Here is one: I’ll spend more time later -
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-newyorktimes/new-york-times-pays-damages-to-singapores-leaders-idUSTRE62N26D20100324
Well, I guess one (1) is
And that wasn’t even a NYT article - it was from the IHT. I also noticed that Singapore’s leaders have also extracted damages from the WSJ, Bloomberg and The Economist, so it’s not like the NYT is alone in getting successfully sued by this particular - apparently very litigious - entity.
The cheerleader case was excellent, and made me slightly more relaxed about SCOTUS. Slightly.
1 Like
The International Herald Tribune IS the New York Times. Wholly owned, and pretty much all their stories are straight from the NYT newsroom, “curated” for an international (mostly traveling Americans) audience.
1 Like
Is there an Annapolis paper you trust?
The Lobster 
Times or something similar?
