BuzzFeed Just Got DEVASTATING News After Trashing Trump


Online liberal rag BuzzFeed could be facing some very serious consequences after it decided that trashing Trump was more important than responsible journalism.

The popular news website this week published an “intelligence” dossier claiming Trump had colluded with Russia to hack the Democrats, and that Moscow had compromising evidence of a sexual nature against the president-elect.

BuzzFeed admitted that none of the claims in the report could be verified. But it decided to publish anyway and let people decide the truth for themselves.

The obvious goal was to rile people up against Trump.

But knowingly using possibly false information to do so is against the law.

Media law professor Mark Grabowski writes over at Washington Examiner:

“…BuzzFeed may be vulnerable.”

“Libel (which is also sometimes referred to as defamation and slander) is publication or broadcast of a false statement of fact that seriously harms someone’s reputation.”

“Even though BuzzFeed did not actually produce the document – they claimed it was leaked by a foreign intelligence officer – they’re still liable for libel.”

“In BuzzFeed’s case, though, many of the allegations are factual statements that could be proven to be false.”

Sponsored Links

“BuzzFeed arguably acted recklessly in publishing this document. It didn’t bother independently verifying the “leaked” information, which responsible journalists do, especially when it comes to allegations as explosive as those in the dossier.”

“Soon Trump could be deciding BuzzFeed’s fate, as libel lawsuits can lead to multi-million dollar payouts and the shuttering of media outlets.”

During the campaign, Trump threatened to reopen libel laws so that mainstream media could no longer get away with lying about people.

“I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” Trump told supporters on the campaign trail.

Sponsored Links

But, as Grabowski noted, “in this case, the law doesn’t need to be changed at all for that to happen.”

Recommended for you

Comments are closed.