The Times op-ed in question, published on June 14 in response to the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, falsely stated that an ad from Palin’s political action committee put “Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.” The Times issued a correction the next day stating that the article had mischaracterized the ad (it targets electoral districts, not specific Democratic lawmakers, as the article had previously claimed), and that “no such link was established.”
Nonetheless, Palin—who recently invited Ted Nugent and Kid Rock to dine with her and the President at the White House because “Jesus was booked”—is seeking $75,000 in damages for conduct committed, “knowingly, intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously, with the intent harm Mrs. Palin, or in blatant disregard of the substantial likelihood of causing her harm.”
Palin’s legal counsel told Deadline that the Times had, “repeatedly failed to meaningfully retract or correct its column and apologize to Mrs. Palin for publishing it.” In fact, the Times did meaningfully correct the column and issued an apology on Twitter.
It’s a ridiculous, insulting charge, however—given enough money, time and influence—powerful plaintiffs have been known to run a vital journalistic publication into the ground a time or two.
