ABC News Wisely Mitigated Risks by Settling With Trump
Decisions don't always make sense on the surface. Digging deeper often can provide context, insights and understanding
Outcomes can confuse and upset us. How did that happen, we ask ourselves? It doesn’t add up, it’s wrong. People got it wrong! It often takes researching deeper to find the reasoning and “why” underneath what currently makes no sense or angers us.
To many professionals in the media — and public observers — it was alarming and maddening that Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against ABC News and broadcaster George Stephanopoulos led to a (robotic, tight-lipped) apology from the network and a $15 million payout for Stephanopoulos’ inaccurate wording regarding the incoming president’s wrongful violent, sexual behavior towards a woman.
Stephanopoulos said on television that Trump had been “found liable for rape” against E. Jean Carroll and “defaming the victim of that rape.”
While most all people would agree that what Trump was described of doing was in fact, rape, “neither verdict involved a finding of rape as defined under New York law,” reported Michael R. Sisak at the Associated Press.
In the first lawsuit, Trump was found liable of sexually abusing and defaming Carroll. At a second lawsuit, Trump was found liable of ongoing defamation.
She was awarded a $5 million judgment in the first verdict and $83.3 million in the second. Trump is appealing.
Communicating to an audience that Trump had committed rape when the courts did not rule that was what happened means what was stated was legally false. He sexually abused her — which is not any less heinous — yet it is different, per New York law.
ABC News journalists were reportedly irate that management didn’t fight Trump, with legal experts believing that the media outlet would have prevailed and by not standing up against him, they failed to support Stephanopoulos, the news department, reporters and the truth.
Facts Verse USA produced a video — “The REAL Reason Why George Stephanopoulos Paid $15M to Settle Trump Lawsuit” — to discover why ABC News chose to settle.
Here are its assertions:
Pre-trial discovery and the deep dive into internal operations, potentially exposing sensitive information that could be leveraged against the network
RI: This is no little thing. If you have something that is potentially embarrassing, shameful and high risk in hiding, you want to avoid legal discovery. ABC News may have had unprofessional or unethical dirt on itself that it didn’t want coming to light.
Cost of prolonged litigation
RI: The settlement amount was relatively mild in comparison to what it could have become.
Extensive negative publicity
RI: This was a given. ABC News decided it didn’t have a high tolerance for this risk so made the decision, figuratively speaking, to “fold its cards.” Begrudgingly.
Financial and reputational stakes for ABC News and George Stephanopoulos would grow significantly
RI: The legal defense costs plus a much larger settlement was distasteful but the bigger pain was the fear of the reputational damage to not only ABC News but it’s top people. It could have further eroded trust in the media outlet, drove greater distrust in media nationally and angered the public and fellow media.
Risk of uncovering damaging information that could further tarnish ABC News' reputation
RI: ABC News isn’t dumb. It knew what was possible or likely to be discovered and it may not have been conducting business ethically, unbiased and free from scandal.
This allowed the network to contain the situation and prevent further escalation
RI: Conducting mitigation of damages and risk is sometimes necessary and wise, no matter how painful it is to the ego and stakeholders.
There are important, valuable, concise points and lessons from this story:
Trump’s behavior is not being questioned. It was wrong. What he reportedly did is considered “rape” by almost everyone. It just didn’t align with the legal definition of it in the state in which the case was held, so communicating it as “rape” is going to get you sued for defamation.
Stephanopoulos is an educated man and experienced professional. He knew what he was communicating and that it wasn’t factual and did so anyway. His arrogance was similar to walking into boiling water. It was reckless. He shouldn’t be surprised. Stephanopoulos was reportedly “apoplectic” about his employer not standing by him. He did it to himself, willingly.
You can feel how you feel and make your own judgment calls: “Trump is a rapist,” if you want to say it. You won’t get many arguments.
You just can’t, as a media member, communicate an inflammatory (legal) falsehood and misrepresentation as a statement of fact when the record shows it isn’t correct.
There will critics who say that ABC News “bent” the knee with Trump in preparation for his upcoming term. It didn’t. It protected itself from greater risk.
Other media professionals and outlets paid attention to what happened to Stephanopoulos and ABC News with the wrong wording about Trump that wasn’t considered factual. “Sexual abuse” would have worked. It’s just as damning.
Hate the man. Express opinion. Don’t communicate in a way that could be deemed defamatory and significantly raise the odds of being sued and be left suffering immense stress, reputation and cost having to defending yourself.
You don’t know if you will be able to defeat the legal action against you.
This newsletter — Reputation Intelligence — is written by Michael Toebe, and is a product of Reputation Intelligence - Reputation Quality, a firm which helps individuals and organizations assure a greater peace of mind, provide stress relief through reliable decision analysis, consulting, advisory and communications.
Professional analysis and opinion — Consulting — Advisory
Reputation Communications — Defamation Response — Speaking Engagements
Crisis Communications — Crisis Management
