CNN admitted a controversial story it broadcast that called into question the practices of a decorated U.S. Navy veteran was “very much not ready for prime time” and was “full of holes like Swiss cheese” — but the supposed worldwide leader in news broadcast it in a supposed “rush” nevertheless.
That is the bombshell unearthed from court filings in the multimillion-dollar defamation suit brought against the troubled and ratings-challenged network, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
In 2021, Jake Tapper — who will host next week’s presidential debate — published a scathing report about Zachary Young and his company Nemex Enterprises Inc., which coordinated rescue missions for people trapped in Afghanistan after President Joe Biden’s disastrous withdrawal.
Tapper and correspondent Alex Marquardt engaged in an on-air back-and-forth about the story, and linked Young to black market operations and the exploitation of individuals trapped in Afghanistan through charging exorbitant prices for their liberation.
But prior to the broadcast, Young — who served four years in the Navy — informed CNN’s Marquardt his proposed segment was full of inaccuracies.
Marquardt and Tapper aired it regardless, after it received approval from the network’s top brass of senior, upper-level executives and internal monitors, whose approval was required for stories of a sensitive or potentially damaging nature.
In a series of internal emails and messages as part of Young’s lawsuit that was last week given the green light to proceed after a Florida appeals court ruled on the matter, CNN showed “cleared animus toward and a motivation to 'nail' Plaintiffs (Young and Nemex Enterprises Inc.), according to documents obtained and reviewed by RadarOnline.com.
"What a punchable face," said one missive.
"What a s---bag," added another.
"This guy is an a-hole," remarked another employee, while others said, “it's your funeral bucko," and "he's a shit."
The back-and-forth between CNN staffers is largely being kept under court seal but snippets have been revealed as part of various court filings.
The release of the secret trove of communications calls into questions the actions of three independent departments at CNN — legal, standards and practice, and editorial — who somehow allowed the story about Young to proceed despite the uneasiness of some behind-the-scenes.
"It's an incomplete story in my opinion," one CNN staffer admitted prior to the broadcast.
After the network’s so-called triad of oversight gave the go-ahead, another hapless CNN staffer remarked: "Well I guess that was the decision then — it's not a good one in my opinion."
"Obviously this isn't how it's meant to work and I would suggest this is still very much not ready for prime time," another staffer observed, according to more internal messages filed in court.
"It raises an important process point about why this happened," remarked another. "I'm sort of suprised (sic) triad approved.”
The story, according to another memo, was "pretty flawed” and should just go to air but be kept off its website as it was not “fleshed out for digital.”
In court papers, CNN called the internal communications “journalistic bravado that reflected a sincere belief in the reporting.”
Never miss a story — sign up for the RadarOnline.com newsletter to get your daily dose of dope. Daily. Breaking. Celebrity news. All free.
As RadarOnline.com previously reported, the First District Court of Appeal in Florida recently ruled in Young’s favor to allow him to amend his complaint in a move that paves the way for the case to go to trial.
The court found Young, and his company provided sufficient evidence showing CNN’s actual malice.
The network’s conduct rose to the level necessary to permit an award of punitive damages, his legal team argued.
The broadcast showed “evidence of ill will, hostility, evil intent on the part” of CNN which was encouraged to find the Warner Bros.-backed network acted with “intentional misconduct or gross negligence,” more legal papers said.
Judge William S. Henry of the Circuit Court of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Bay County, Florida, wrote in an August, 2023, ruling: “Based on a review … Plaintiffs have demonstrated a reasonable basis to show that Defendant (CNN) either knew statements were false (through their actual falsity, omission by failing to provide complete information, or juxtaposing Young's name and image when referencing individuals other than Young to appear to be referencing Young), published information while possessing contradictory information, or published them with reckless disregard despite awareness of their probable falsity, such that Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirement of actual malice.”