The reason NPR, The Washington Post et al are opposing Mann in Virginia is because they grasp that were he to prevail it would not merely be a victory for him but a massive defeat for freedom of information that would more or less gut the law in that state. Likewise, were he to prevail in my own case, it would be the biggest setback for the First Amendment in three decades (since Hustler vs Falwell).
But you gotta love assistant editor Alexis Sobel Fitts and the fact-checking ethics bores at The Columbia Journalism Review, who seem reluctant to check anything:
“But in recent years Mann has become known for his public battles against climate change-denial interest groups seeking opportunities to discredit his research. When the National Review called him ‘the Jerry Sandusky of climate science’ he took them to court for defamation.”
Er, no. It was Rand Simberg at CEI who called Mann “the Jerry Sandusky of climate science”. National Review merely quoted his words, much like The Columbia Journalism Review did.
So maybe Mann should sue you guys, too. Or maybe you could try looking it up next time.
More from my site
