Snyder Camp Upset!!

[SirClintonPortis]

Dan Snyder should take some pointers from Cirque du Soleil and realize that putting corporate interests first for the Redskins has harmed the culture there in more ways than one.

[sportscurmudgeon]

I am not a lawyer and I never played one on TV. So, I defer to others with legal competencies here.

I also defer to SmootSmack as a person closely involved in sports journalism when it comes to the concepts of libel/slander/defamation.

With those disclaimers, the saga unfolding here will change dramatically the instant Dan Snyder sues City Paper and/or the author for libel/slander/defamation. Because the instant he does that, the argument changes entirely from the tone of the disucussion ongoing here.

In court, it will have nothing to do with whether or not Danny Boy has changed his ways or has stepped back from football operations or his good intentions for the team and the fans. It will have to do with the legal standards for libel/slander/defamation. And here are two things that are involved in those legal standards:

1. Truth is an absolute/unassailable defense. If the article had accused Danny Boy of torturing kittens every other night for the last ten years to satisfy some sadistic urges that he cannot control, he could win a lawsuit over those charges - - UNLESS - - those charges happen to be true. A reporter can make any statements/accusations about anyone at any time with absolute immunity - - - if the statements/accusations are true.

2. Danny Boy is a "public figure" - - not just your average guy on the street. That has nothing to do with his bank account; it has to do with his being well known and well recognized by the public because of his actions in his life. For public figures, the legal standards also include a showing in a libel/slander/defamation action that the author or the publication had to have malicious intent in publishing the stuff.

Remember, I am not a lawyer. Having said that, for a public figure to win such a lawsuit is no simple matter.

There are folks out there who say they know the author and that he withheld stuff from that article that he could not verify. Let me be clear, I do NOT know the author and I have no idea if those statements are true. However, if the statements of those supporters are correct, that would imply an awful lot of fact-checking on his part prior to publication. A lawsuit would determine just how much fact-checking was done here...

Reports also say that Snyder's lawyers have informed the Washington Post to preserve any and all e-mails between the author here and Post columnist Dan Steinberg. I have no idea if that is an important element of this matter or if this is just a threat to make it seem as if the Snyder lawyers are out for blood. But I will suggest the following:

If Danny Boy drags the Washington Post into a lawsuit and thre is no basis for doing so, he will have violated an old precept of public relations:

Never pick a fight with someone who buys newsprint by the carload and ink by the barrel.

This has the potential to get very interesting...

I wonder if the author and or City Paper will file a counter-suit saying that any action filed by Danny Boy was a frivolous and capricious action? That might be fun too...

In legal proceedings there is a process called, "Discovery". Just a hunch here, but neither side would enjoy jumping through the "Discovery" hoops the other side will construct.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

I am not a lawyer and I never played one on TV. So, I defer to others with legal competencies here.

I also defer to SmootSmack as a person closely involved in sports journalism when it comes to the concepts of libel/slander/defamation.

With those disclaimers, the saga unfolding here will change dramatically the instant Dan Snyder sues City Paper and/or the author for libel/slander/defamation. Because the instant he does that, the argument changes entirely from the tone of the disucussion ongoing here.

In court, it will have nothing to do with whether or not Danny Boy has changed his ways or has stepped back from football operations or his good intentions for the team and the fans. It will have to do with the legal standards for libel/slander/defamation. And here are two things that are involved in those legal standards:

1. Truth is an absolute/unassailable defense. If the article had accused Danny Boy of torturing kittens every other night for the last ten years to satisfy some sadistic urges that he cannot control, he could win a lawsuit over those charges - - UNLESS - - those charges happen to be true. A reporter can make any statements/accusations about anyone at any time with absolute immunity - - - if the statements/accusations are true.

2. Danny Boy is a "public figure" - - not just your average guy on the street. That has nothing to do with his bank account; it has to do with his being well known and well recognized by the public because of his actions in his life. For public figures, the legal standards also include a showing in a libel/slander/defamation action that the author or the publication had to have malicious intent in publishing the stuff.

Remember, I am not a lawyer. Having said that, for a public figure to win such a lawsuit is no simple matter.

There are folks out there who say they know the author and that he withheld stuff from that article that he could not verify. Let me be clear, I do NOT know the author and I have no idea if those statements are true. However, if the statements of those supporters are correct, that would imply an awful lot of fact-checking on his part prior to publication. A lawsuit would determine just how much fact-checking was done here...

Reports also say that Snyder's lawyers have informed the Washington Post to preserve any and all e-mails between the author here and Post columnist Dan Steinberg. I have no idea if that is an important element of this matter or if this is just a threat to make it seem as if the Snyder lawyers are out for blood. But I will suggest the following:

If Danny Boy drags the Washington Post into a lawsuit and thre is no basis for doing so, he will have violated an old precept of public relations:

Never pick a fight with someone who buys newsprint by the carload and ink by the barrel.

This has the potential to get very interesting...

I wonder if the author and or City Paper will file a counter-suit saying that any action filed by Danny Boy was a frivolous and capricious action? That might be fun too...

In legal proceedings there is a process called, "Discovery". Just a hunch here, but neither side would enjoy jumping through the "Discovery" hoops the other side will construct.

Might bring out a lot of files that the Skins wouldn't want out as well. Who knows what could be subpoenaed and hit the public.

[hooskins]

Look, regardless of the validity of the story its the freaking city paper. Doesn't he have bigger fish to fry? I think its pathetic and embarrassing that an owner is so personally TO'ed about an article.

Why not spend all that time and effort in bettering the team, to remove the negative perception created by his first decade of ownership?

[skinsfan69]

Snyder needs to worry about whether or not he's got the right guys doing the job, rather than worrying about what some writer in City Paper is saying. Grow some skin Napoleon.

[Defensewins]

I am sure there are extremes to all sides of the DS debate that are wrong or exaggerated.
Dan just needs to stay above it and not get in the gutter and roll around in the dirt with the idiots. He also needs to stop reacting out of an emotional angry situation.
He reminds a bit of a powerful politician that makes policy decisions based on popularity polls.
It amazes me that Dan was a huge Redskins fan during the Jack Kent Cooke era and did not pick up on some of things JKC did and did not do that worked well.

[NYCSkin]

Dan Snyder is a walking nightmare for a PR firm. Add this episode to the litany of PR disasters associated with him. He should stick to what he knows--profiting yearly off a bad product.

When I read that article in November I thought it was funny. Did I believe every word in it? No. But Snyder's current response just validates so much of the intrinsic message of the McKenna piece.

So the media does not like you. Get over it. Fans don't like you. Get over it.

Snyder needs to concentrate on being respected over liked anyway. Start by getting the respect of the people in your organization. And gain their respect not through threats and the fact that you have a large wallet. Support them as a good business owner should. Spend your offseason doing something productive like installing a heated practice field or building a practice bubble near Redskins Park that the team desperately needs. If I am a player or someone else in the organization--I am wondering why billionaire Snyder is not knocking these facilities out and getting them done in the offseason...

[hooskins]

I think I a lot of the posters have similar views on this.

No matter what you say about how Snyder is much different, he still doesn't get it. If he did he wouldn't be responding to these kinds of articles.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by hooskins

I think I a lot of the posters have similar views on this.

No matter what you say about how Snyder is much different, he still doesn't get it. If he did he wouldn't be responding to these kinds of articles.

Thats exactly the way i feel. Hes still completely out of touch

[SFREDSKIN]

Dan Snyder is trying to get a newspaper reporter fired - Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

[SolidSnake84]

That stuff is not BS in the article. All of the examples given have new articles cited. Additionally, any real redskins fan can read those facts given and see immediately that it was something that Snyder would do.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

That stuff is not BS in the article. All of the examples given have new articles cited. Additionally, any real redskins fan can read those facts given and see immediately that it was something that Snyder would do.

A lot of the information is either simply not true or misleading.

http://www.thewarpath.net/760520-post45.html

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

A lot of the information is either simply not true or misleading.

http://www.thewarpath.net/760520-post45.html

There are definitely a few misleading and out of context things, but i dont think any of the items could be characterized as "not true". And theres not lot of these misleading things by any means, its a few things with all the major stuff cited.

Plus the "article" is meant to be clever; its called "The Cranky Redskins Fan's Guide to Dan Snyder From A to Z (for Zorn)”. Its not a detailed account of mishaps Synder is involved in, it’s a summary of mishaps he’s involved in written with an obvious anti-Snyder sentiment. The writer isnt basing his opinion of Synder though misleading accounts, but rather piling on or furthering his case through a few speculations or out of context and misleading examples, which is okay in my opinion based on his established underlying tone.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

There are definitely a few misleading and out of context things, but i dont think any of the items could be characterized as "not true". And theres not lot of these misleading things by any means, its a few things with all the major stuff cited.

Plus the "article" is meant to be clever; its called "The Cranky Redskins Fan's Guide to Dan Snyder From A to Z (for Zorn)”. Its not a detailed account of mishaps Synder is involved in, it’s a summary of mishaps he’s involved in written with an obvious anti-Snyder sentiment. The writer isnt basing his opinion of Synder though misleading accounts, but rather piling on or furthering his case through a few speculations or out of context and misleading examples, which is okay in my opinion based on his established underlying tone.

I'll agree with you, there is also the question of where this article was placed. What I'm referring to is I thought the WP had an "Opinion" section that may come out on Sundays. Clearly this is a biased opinionated article which would be perfect for that section and readers. If the editors had it placed in the everyday "Sports" section would be wrong.

I'm just guessing it was in the "Sports" section and the thought was to stir the pot and get more readers and again I'll say bad judgement on the editors.

[irish]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I'll agree with you, there is also the question of where this article was placed. What I'm referring to is I thought the WP had an "Opinion" section that may come out on Sundays. Clearly this is a biased opinionated article which would be perfect for that section and readers. If the editors had it placed in the everyday "Sports" section would be wrong.

I'm just guessing it was in the "Sports" section and the thought was to stir the pot and get more readers and again I'll say bad judgement on the editors.

The article was in the City Paper not the WP.