Want to see the dichotomy of the media on display? Consider how, over the course of 2024, there has been no shortage of energetic coverage of Donald Trump and his lawfare trials. Not just the courtroom antics either, as Trump’s mugshot was blasted across every broadcast for the better part of a week. For at least two of the indictments, we were granted live coverage of Trump commuting to the airport to fly to the destination of his court appearance.

Despite the hyperventilating coverage of the former president’s legal wranglings, other court cases involving the media are receiving scant attention; this is for obvious reasons. One is that the press is lobbying hard to impact Trump’s electoral chances, so the overhype takes place. Another is that not only are these lawsuits being brought against the media, they are seeing a surprising level of success.

Defamation suits are notoriously difficult to see through to any degree of progress. First Amendment issues are a primary reason, but also the steep difficulty in both obtaining evidence and then establishing cause is frequently faced. The degree of legal movement we are currently seeing might be regarded as a sign of the industry's increasing failure to adhere to foundational journalism standards.

The news outlets are understandably reticent when it comes to mentioning defamation suits against the industry. Additionally, they are less thrilled about two other cases involving a reviled network (Fox), both of which have dissolved. With that reality in place let’s take a look at the interesting collection of cases involving the media and where they currently stand.

Zachary Young vs. CNN

This is the defamation case we have been covering where the network is being sued for the targeting of a private hot zone contractor in the Middle East who saw his career tank after allegedly slanderous coverage. The courts have seen sufficient evidence to bring this to a jury trial, including recent revelations of more internal communications showing malicious approaches to the story, with flawed reporting to boot.

This week new filings by the plaintiff’s party addressed the network's attempts to bury more documents from disclosure, including deleting some potential evidence. CNN is also pushing the court hard to waive off the requests to have Jake Tapper deposed in the case. This one is looking uglier for the network, so it will not be a surprise to see an effort made at a settlement.

Mahendra Amin vs. MSNBC

This involves a series of reports filed by Jacob Soboroff, Julia Ainsley, and Danielle Silvaand, which ran on numerous programs at MSNBC, including those of Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, and Nicolle Wallace. The reports claimed that Dr. Amin had performed a lengthy series of hysterectomies on numerous illegal immigrants at the behest of border officials, where they dubbed the doctor “The Uterus Collector.”

In the $30 million suit, the discovery process has shown internal discussions that show the lack of evidence for this claim. It had all been based on the solitary testimony of an internal whistleblower at a Georgia hospital, and the reporters even confirmed that in total they could only find evidence of two of the procedures performed over a period of nearly two years. The judge cited dozens of false allegations in the discovery documents, and the single source relied upon for the reports has even admitted that much of her testimony had been based on hearsay.

Donald Trump vs. ABC News

Considering all of the wild coverage of Trump it is notable that a pair of defamation suits he has brought to trial have been deemed worthy of moving to the jury phase. In one case a Florida judge has determined that Trump’s claim that George Stephanopoulos could be found by a jury to have defamed Trump. This is from the contentious interview the ABC News host conducted with Rep. Nancy Mace back in March, in their discussion of the E. Jean Carroll suit where a jury convicted Trump of sexually abusing her. Stephanopoulos repeatedly stated Trump was guilty of rape, while the Carroll case did not take the ruling to that level.

Trump vs. Pulitzer Prizes Board

In another Florida-based case, the court denied a request by the Pulitzer Prize board to dismiss a libel lawsuit brought by Trump regarding its decision to uphold the award it had granted for coverage of the Russian collusion scandal. This suit stems from a decision announced in 2022 where the Pulitzers stated it was upholding the awards it granted years earlier.

In 2018 the National Reporting Prize had been jointly given to The New York Times and The Washington Post for their coverage of the involvement of Russians in the 2016 general election. There was controversy, however, after the prize had been awarded: the Robert Mueller Report came out that showed there was no firm evidence to be found, which contradicted much of the coverage from those outlets. This decision means the case may now move forward to the always-fun discovery phase.

Gina Carano vs. The Disney Company

This one concerns the long-simmering issue between the actress and Disney regarding her firing from the show “The Mandalorian,” over some postings she made on social media. Of particular paradox was that this centered on her post regarding intolerance and how it could lead to a Weimar Republic type of result, all while her costar Pedro Pascal had made a far more inflammatory Nazi reference in a post and suffered no reprisal from the studio. 

Xitter CEO Elon Musk once proposed that he would fund any lawsuit regarding this type of firing over posts made on his platform, and Carano took him up on that offer. Attempts by the studio to dismiss - including its daft claim of First Amendment rights essentially meant Gina had equal claim to the same - have been rebuffed and it is now likely to move to a jury trial or settlement.

[Then in a pair of cases involving the favorite reviled target in the press, Fox News…]

Hunter Biden vs. Fox News

The President’s recidivist son had brought a revenge porn suit against Fox pertaining to its use of his personal images in the streaming series “The Trial of Hunter Biden.” The series ran on the Fox Nation streaming platform in 2022, and Hunter’s suit claimed the fictionalized program used ribald images and examples of him engaged in sexual acts.

On Sunday, July 21 - the same day that his father announced he would step away from running for the presidency - Hunter’s lawyers filed a voluntary dismissal notice to withdraw the three-week-old suit. 

Nina Jankowicz vs. Fox

This one appears to only support the opinion held by many that Jankowicz, the former head of the ridiculed-into-insolvency Disinformation Governance Board, has a longstanding battle with the truth. That had been the outfit formed in the DHS agency to combat disinformation and saw its doors closed in less than a month's time. It was said that disinformation on social media misrepresented the DGB and caused its demise.

Jankowicz sued Fox for defamation and cited three dozen instances of personally being misrepresented on the air. The judge tossed her case because he found that in 36 of her 37 claims, Fox News referenced the DGB, not her, and in the remaining claim found that the network had delivered a factual statement because it was simply quoting directly from the board’s charter.