• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, 5 hours ago

The journalism business has been hit with another crisis involving Donald Trump.  

Tim Davie has resigned as director general of BBC and Deborah Turness as head of news over a documentary that in which a speech given by Trump on January 6, 2021purportedly was edited to show he was calling for violence. 

BBC has pulled the documentary and apologized, but Trump is threatening a defamation suit for $1 billion over the “malicious, disparaging” edits.  

This is happening as BBC is making a major push in the United States. 

The documentary was shown last year prior to the election, and apparently was reviewed internally.

What’s the issue? The edited version has Trump saying: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol. And I’ll be there with you. And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” 

If you're bent that way, you might take that as proof that Trump was trying to incite violence.  

But as shown by The Guardian, the “fight like hell” comment was made much later in the speech. So while Trump said it, it did not follow his comment, ”I’ll be there with you.”  

Was this edit part of a deliberate attempt to tie Trump to the violence that day? Politicians and commentators have charged that he did incite the crowd — it’s a matter of opinion. 

A good libel lawyer may have spotted the edit, and called for pulling that version or at least being transparent about the fact that it was edited.  

It would be a fascinating defamation trial for libel wonks. But it would be expensive, and one wonders whether libel insurance would cover any judgment against the publications. 

Based on Times-Sullivan decision, good-faith factual errors do not constitute defamation of a public figure.

Still, Trump has been very aggressive toward the media, suing both The New York Times and Dow Jones for billions. Both say the cases against them have no merit.  

The real message for news organizations is that they have to be careful, given this new state of affairs.  

Editors should insist that libel attorneys vet any negative content about Trump or public figures in general.

And of course, they must do the same when reporting on private individuals.

We’re sure that responsible U.S. newspapers were already doing so. And, that said, they must continue fighting for their First Amendment rights.