NFL demands retraction of Times article on player concussions

[RecoveringCowboy]

Big problem for The Times. If they don't agree to the NFL's demands the league is going to give them their worst games this season.........

Covering the Jets followed by the Giants.

 

[neuronet]

It is serious. His law firm wrote the letter to the nytimes

Then we have come full circle and hopefully the NFL will digest itself...

 

[cmasspatsfan]

1) LOL @ NFL
2) They'll never sue. Not in a million years. Because if they did, they'd have to open up all their own books.

Michael McCann agrees

Michael McCann ‏@McCannSportsLaw 3h3 hours ago
Michael McCann Retweeted Stephanie Haberman

Will NFL follow up this demand by suing NY Times for libel? Would love to see what's revealed in pretrial discovery.

 

[The Gr8est]

What is the quote about getting in fights with newspspers?

Something about it isn't smart to get into fights with people who buy ink by the barrel.

 

[SVN]

 

[zydecochris]

Seriously, 100% this. Normally I'd say "nobody would be stupid enough to file this lawsuit, it would just bring more attention to a very real problem that the NFL is trying desperately to keep out of the public eye". But the NFL just might be that stupid.

I admit I am a bit baffled by the NFL's strategy. I was hoping to hear some of the Patsfans lawyer types (I know there are several) to see what they think.

The CTB thing in my mind is an existential threat to the NFL owners and management. As you say BradyFTW!, one would think that the NFL would just hope that people would not notice or forget about this NY Times article.

By threatening to sue, they bring it back to the forefront (I would think many times fold).

.....And, surely they wouldn't really sue? Wouldn't that open them up to discovery?

Many on this board wanted to see Brady sue the NFL for defamation. I thought the eventual consensus that emerged was that even though Brady had plenty of grounds, the discovery process would be so onerous for him (with the NFL leaking every sort of personal detail, cell phone picture, or possible embarrassment) that if he sued he could win the battle but lose the war. And, all he could win was money anyway, and he has plenty of that.

Wouldn't a lawsuit open the NFL to exactly that type of discovery process that could yield a wealth of embarrassing details regarding their treatment of CTB?

And of course, this is after the NFL has spent a year and a half trying to beat up one of its most popular members (Brady) with Deflategate, and establish itself as a ruthless organization that ignores facts and tries to grind its opponent into submission at all costs. That doesn't seem like the best strategy just before this CTB thing is coming up.

Can any of the Patsfans explain the NFL strategy?

....Or, perhaps it is simply that this is why every other sport is led by a Commissioner with a Law Degree.

 

[ANGR89]

I just love that they say that they were defamed.....lmao hypocrites!!!!

 

[ANGR89]

I also can't believe they would put anything else out there associating their name with Ted Wells again.....but they really are that stupid and think their untouchable.

 

[XLIX]

Can any of the Patsfans explain the NFL strategy?

IMHO part of their strategy relies on the public's assumption that if they do nothing, that would be a tacit admission of guilt. So they're denying everything and huffing and puffing but won't really file any sort of legal action because, as mentioned before, that opens them up to discovery.

 

[XLIX]

The NFL wrote in their letter:

"We also request that the Times's reporters and editors who worked on this story preserve their notes, correspondence, emails, recordings and work papers and all other electronic and hard copy documents generated or received in connection with their work."

If I was the NY Times editor, I would respond with a statement saying. "Everything we wrote is true. We also request that the NFL league office and medical personnel preserve their notes, correspondence, recordings and work papers and all other electronic and hard copy documents generated or received in connection with the issue of CTE over the past 20 years."

 

[Joey007]

Ohhh what goes around truly comes around, don't it?

 

[ivanvamp]

The NFL is littered with some of the biggest hypocrites I've ever seen. But they have balls. To just blatantly put out there that it is defamatory because the NYT has "no direct evidence" and only has a handful of random pieces of data that don't really make the case, given what they used to take two draft picks and $1 million from the Patriots, and suspend Tom Brady, is just unbelievable.

 

[RobertWeathers]

gall 1
(gôl)
n.
1. Outrageous insolence; effrontery: After borrowing my car, he had the gall to complain about its seats.

 

[zydecochris]

NFL demands retraction of Times article on player concussions

And Ted Wells' "independent" law firm is reportedly leading the charge to an unlikely defamation suit.

This is just so bizarre that it doesn't even need comment (so of course, I will comment).

• For its DeflateGate Investigation, the NFL hires a firm Wells / Exponent that had heavy involvement in arguing that tobacco smoke doesn't cause cancer: Science firm used in Wells report argued secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
• As has been pointed out by virtually every scientist, the Wells report ignores simple science like the Ideal Gas Law and published a report with completely flawed, questionable science (although it wasn't even questionable, it was just wrong and intentionally misleading).
  
• The New York Times publishes an article pointing out that the "NFL's concussion research was flawed, likening the league's "handling of its health crisis to that of the tobacco industry, which was notorious for using questionable science to play down the dangers of cigarettes."
  
• The NFL threatens to sue the New York Times, and the firm that is leading the charge to sue is....wait for it....the same group that had such heavy involvement in arguing that smoking didn't cause cancer (plus the scientifically flawed Wells Report).

The NFL couldn't find some other firm other than the one that was so involved in the Tobacco cover up in the first place to threaten a lawsuit for the New York Time article that made that exact point?!?!

Just when I think that the NFL has reached an apex of absurdity and lack of self awareness, they reach new heights.

 

[ANGR89]

Has the New York Times officially responded to this yet? please tell me they said their not retracting anything!

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

Big problem for The Times. If they don't agree to the NFL's demands the league is going to give them their worst games this season.........

Just like last year

 

[XLIX]

Has the New York Times officially responded to this yet? please tell me they said their not retracting anything!

According to the Politico article:

Sports editor Jason Stallman said the Times sees "no reason to retract anything."

 

[mosey threetupu]

View attachment 12575

Just realized Dean Wermer is Fletcher from The Outlaw Josey Wales

View attachment 12575

Just realized Dean Wermer is Fletcher from The Outlaw Josey Wales

 

[XLIX]

At first, I chuckled at the irony of the situation and the parallels to deflategate. Then, upon further investigation, I laughed uproariously at the irony of the situation and the parallels to deflategate!

The league complains "the story cites a single letter, written almost a quarter of a century ago, from the general counsel of Lorillard to the NFL's outside counsel at Skadden Arps". Almost as silly as taking one single text written a couple years ago, huh?

The league complains "that an NFL employee had a long friendship with someone who, years after they met, went to work for the Tobacco Institute; and (4) that an NFL executive previously worked for an advertising agency that worked with tobacco company clients, among many other clients." Sounds like the NFL knew about, consented to and provided inducements to that person to me.

The league complains "The Times''s intent was obvious: It sought to publicly associate the NFL with the tobacco industry and all that implies, in a "front-page" story, no less—without a scintilla of evidence to support such a link. And there is no doubt that the Times achieved its purpose and defamed and substantially damaged the NFL and its reputation. ... Would any fair-minded, objective, responsible journalist contend that these "connections" establish a meaningful "tie" between these corporate entities sufficient to support the lead front-page story in the Times'?" Oh my.

 

[Ivan]

the image that comes to mind is Goodell as Cartman with his big wheel, cop uniform, and raybans screaming


You will

Respect


MY AUTHORITI!