1. 16-year-old Nicholas Sandmann was falsely accused of mocking a Native American elder. The widespread publishing of numerous articles by reputable news organizations like The Washington Post led many people to believe this student did something that he never did and led to numerous death threats against him and his family and school. Some called for all colleges to reject applications from any Covington Catholic students and to otherwise destroy their lives.

Sandmann’s attorneys laid out their evidence that The Washington Post, in a series of six articles, published defamatory and false information about Sandmann, concluding,

As the natural and foreseeable consequence of its actions, the Post knew and intended that its False and Defamatory Accusations would be republished by others, including media outlets and others on social media.

The attorneys say the newspaper published its pieces smearing Sandmann “negligently and with actual malice.”

a) Do you agree with the attorneys’ claim in the lawsuit: “The Post ignored basic journalist standards because it wanted to advance its well-known and easily documented, biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump by impugning individuals perceived to be supporters of the president”? Explain your answer.

b) What responsibility do you think publishers/editors have to confirm the accuracy of a story before reporting it?

CHALLENGE:

1. Read the story (and watch videos): “Fuller video casts new light on Covington Catholic students’ encounter with Native American elder”
2. Read the lawsuit.
3. Read a previous bias post: "Adults call for violence against teens over their politics; media silent"

Does this information change your opinion about the story? Explain your answer.