The liberal media love to portray themselves as the sole gatekeepers of truth and facts; and when they get called out for getting things wrong, they get very testy and indignant. The Associated Press flashed that attitude in a letter to Navy veteran Zachary Young, and in recent comments about the defamation suit against them (after they falsely claimed Young was engaged in “human smuggling” in Afghanistan). Young cited the AP’s comments in a recent motion for punitive damages.
Patrick Maks, the AP’s director of media relations and corporate communications, wrote off the lawsuit in comments made to left-leaning Newsweek on Friday:
"AP's story was a factual and accurate report on the jury verdict finding in Zachary Young's favor," Patrick Maks, director of media relations and corporate communications at the Associated Press, told Newsweek on Friday. "We will vigorously defend our reporting against this frivolous lawsuit."
Young’s filing for punitive damages cited Maks’ comments as evidence of malice:
AP’s malice did not end with publication. After this lawsuit was filed, and despite the existence of a jury verdict in Mr. Young’s favor, a court ruling that he committed no crime, and CNN’s own retraction and confidential settlement, AP issued a public statement to Newsweek describing this action as a “frivolous lawsuit.” Specifically, AP’s director of media relations stated: “We will vigorously defend our reporting against this frivolous lawsuit,” while simultaneously admitting that AP’s article was about “the jury verdict finding in Zachary Young’s favor.” This comment, made outside any pleading or protected legal context, reflects AP’s continued intent to delegitimize Mr. Young’s vindication and retaliate against him for seeking accountability. It is further evidence of express malice and a willful refusal to accept the falsity of AP’s statement even after formal notice and public adjudication. Such a statement compounds the reputational harm already done and underscores the need for punitive damages to deter further misconduct.
The filing also included a letter exchanged between Young’s legal representatives and the AP’s. Also included was the AP’s response letter where they defend their erroneous use of “smuggle” in their reporting about Young’s victory over CNN:
Despite the indisputable accuracy of this reporting on the trial, your letter takes issue with one word, “smuggle,” to refer to the activities the Article described as helping to “rescue endangered Afghans” (emphasis added) and complains that the Article omitted some facts favorable to Mr. Young, including a prior summary judgement victory.
As evidence that the AP historically used the term “smuggle” to describe illegal activities, Young linked to 25 AP articles. He also shared with the court a screenshot of a Facebook post from the AP Stylebook which defined “human smuggling” as “Human smuggling or people smuggling typically involves transporting people across an international border illegally, with their consent, in exchange for a fee.”
The AP’s letter also pushed back on Young’s argument that the report’s phrasing implied criminality on his part. “That is simply unreasonable in the context of the Article as whole. Literally, in the first sentence of the Article explains that Mr. Young’s activities consisted of “help[ing] rescue endangered Afghans” (emphasis added),” they wrote.
Appearing to angle that Young was no longer a private citizen but rather a limited purpose public figure because of the CNN trial, the AP’s letter cited Young’s interviews with media outlets post-verdict. Their citations included NewsBusters’ interview with Young.
When asked what the result of the trial meant to him, Young said: “It’s been a long three years and I got the outcome that I wanted. I wanted vindication. I wanted to show what happened. And I was able to do that. It wasn’t a pleasant experience, but it had a great outcome.” pic.twitter.com/UkRktN62Ym
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 18, 2025
