1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!


Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by SnarkShark, Oct 13, 2014.

  1. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    I know this will be shocking to you all, but the Daily News may have misrepresented the actions of a Philadelphia Eagles' employee.

  2. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    The Eagles employee says he was cheering the play, not the injury, and had dropped to one knee to pray for Cruz once it was known he was hurt.


    I wonder if the guy could sue the News for libel.
  3. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Of course he was. And I wouldn't blame him for suing.
  4. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    1. Did the Daily News know it was intentionally misrepresenting him? I'd bet yes.
    2. Is he a public figure? Debatable.
    3. Was his reputation harmed or did he suffer financially because of this photo and can he prove it? I doubt it.

    Conclusion? Libel suit would be pointless.
  5. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    If he's only going by "Charlie" in all these articles and no one knows his last name, I'd say he's not a public figure.
  6. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    There's no way in hell an Eagles game day employee is a public figure, unless he's the team mascot.
  7. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    I should think his rep could be harmed by showing any number of tweets or internet messages criticizing him.
  8. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    I think what TDN did here was shitty, but I don't see how they'd ever lose any kind of libel suit. How does this guy "prove" he was NOT cheering Cruz's injury? (He clearly wasn't but how does one prove such a thing?) Or that there was actual malice involved? The News could easily argue this was an editorial statement, name-calling, and show they did not doctor the photo. As horseshit as I think it was, he's not winning a libel suit.
  9. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    I think it would be difficult to prove beyond doubt he wasn't cheering Cruz's injury, but it wouldn't be that hard. I'm pretty sure there is video evidence of him stopping his cheering soon after the play was over. No way he can know Cruz was injured that quickly.

    Also, he doesn't have to prove malice, because he's not a public figure.
  10. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    If they were able to subpoena game footage from NBC, they could probably follow his reaction from beginning to end. Watching a highlight of the play, he's clearly in the frame on the shot from the sideline camera as Cruz goes down. He gives two fist pumps (presumably celebrating the play), but it cuts away after that. A longer or unedited shot would likely show his next reaction.
    Whether or not he suffered any damages, though, is harder to prove. If the Eagles fire him over it, he might have a case.
  11. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    He was probably just enthusiastically voicing his support for the Philly teachers union.
  12. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Agreed. Would be harder to to come up with damages, but there are plenty of good lawyers who are more than able to come up with something.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page