More sick humour from The Onion.
I hope no young gymnasts think this is real.
Click PLAY or watch the fake news story on YouTube.
Thanks Rocco.
Shawn Johnson Put To Sleep After Breaking Leg
June 16th, 2009 | uncategorized
tumbling, tramp, diving, cheer, acrobatics, circus, dance, martial arts, X sports ... and more
-
Work at Cirque
Strength Manual
International Best-Selling Gymnastics Textbook
Used In 36 Countries Worldwide Florida Meets
Gymnastics Equipment and Supplies
Soft Safe Mats
Support TumblTrak
Tumbl Trak sells gymnastic training equipment for tumbling, vaulting, and bars and beam. Featured products include Air Traks, Tumbl Traks, and spring floors. For over 20 years Tumbl Trak has been known for great customer service and innovative design.
tumble on air
Home and Gym Equipment
Coach Education Videos
-
Rick McCharles
Clinics, Camps, Consults
Rick_McCharles @hotmail.com Suggest story. Report Typo. Or make Correction.
0 comments ↓
Well, I guess if she ever needed a clue that she had made it, this is it.
This is just cruel. Technically, it’s possible grounds for slander/libel. Not smart.
Not at all grounds for slander or libel there Katrina.
Geez, get a sense of humor and a dictionary! Slander and libel are not even CLOSE to what this piece is. It’s called satire, and it’s totally protected speech.
Anon I have a sense of humor but this isn’t.
Defintion of Slander:
Also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification, is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.
This just does exactly that.
I still think it’s horrible.
This is hysterical!
Whereas some “false claims” are being made in the video, it is questionable whether these are “expressly stated or implied to be factual”, and I really don’t see how they could give Shawn a negative image. If, as said by Katrina, this really is such a horrible sense of humor, the only reputations that may be damaged here are those of the creators of the video.
Katrina, if I may explain your Wikipedia definition of slander, and why this isn’t slander:
This may be painful, most learning is. It will involve some history, as, also, most learning does.
Prior to New York Times v. Sullivan, defamation was a strict liability offense. Sullivan, however, changed the law making public officials required to prove actual malice. Subsequent cases, Associated Press v. Walker and Curtis Pub. Co. v. Butts (1967), and Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), extrapolated this holding to all public figures. Shawn Johnson is most definitely a public figure (celebrity). Prior to Sullivan, damages were also presumed. Now, they are no longer presumed, and plaintiffs bringing a cause of action for defamation are required to prove damages.
If Shawn were to bring a cause of action against the Onion for this piece, she’d have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they intended actual malice toward her, AND that she was damaged in some way. She is likely incapable of proving either of these, and therefore her case would fail.
Furthermore, Pring v. Penthouse Int’l, Ltd., 695 F.2d 438 (10th Cir. 1982) held that if the statements cannot be taken as LITERALLY true, it CANNOT be defamatory or libelous. NO ONE in his or her right mind would actually believe that a mother and father had their daughter SHOT IN THE HEAD over a broken leg. It is clearly a joke, despite you not finding it funny. Only an insanely stupid person would believe that this piece, on a KNOWN comedy website, could be true. And the law does not hold people to an insanely stupid person standard. Typically, in tort cases, the law holds people to an objective standard known as the “reasonably prudent person.” No reasonably prudent person would believe this bit is literally true, therefore, no jurisdiction would likely allow a jury to hear this case. It would be dismissed on summary judgment, unquestionably.
Furthermore, Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988) holds that a public figure can’t even bring a cause of action for emotional distress, as that would circumvent the breathing space for editorial cartoons and be an end-run around against all prior established precedent permitting the free and open expression of ideas.
Furthermore, there are several defenses the Onion could bring, not the least of which you will find if you go back to your Wikipedia page and scroll down through the defenses. There is no injury here. Shawn’s reputation is not damaged, she is not harmed, she would have absolutely no chance of proving damages in court, and absolutely not be able to show that she is entitled to any money. She couldn’t even get an injunction to have the Onion pull this off their site. And without proving actual malice, she couldn’t even get punitive damages. No punitive damages and no actual damages mean no case.
When most people say that a plaintiff was “laughed out of court,” they are speaking figuratively. If the Johnson family actually tried to bring this suit, they would be literally laughed out of court.
Sorry Kat, you’re over-reacting again.
You’re not a lawyer Kat, don’t use legal terms that you don’t understand. And don’t use Wikipedia without reading the whole article. If what you meant to say was “I don’t like this, I don’t find it funny, I think it is insulting,” then so be it. But don’t couch it in terms that you have no knowledge or expertise to use. We have far too many people doing that as coaches, making this sport a crap shoot for finding a quality gym. Which is why I’ve taken this opportunity to drop some legal knowledge on you, because I care about whether people know what they’re talking about and I hate it when people misrepresent themselves as being knowledgeable about things they aren’t. It hurts the world, it hurts our country, it hurts our sport.
LMAO! that was hilarious!
Katrina: You. Are. Retarded.
Case closed!
OK, totally delete my quickly (poorly) typed and not totally thought out response. (I’d do it myself if I could.) “Just Another Opinion” you are my hero! What I should have said was … Umm, doy, what he (or she) said.
I laughed quite hard.
Also, agreeing with Just Another Opinion. To call this libel/slander demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the terms.
I did delete the one post, anon.
But freedom of speach is more important than people being offended by The Onion.
What they do. And Colbert. Is cutting edge social commentary.
Anyone can skip clicking PLAY on Onion videos if they worry they are profane or offensive. And no one has to read the comments on this blog. They are hidden from general readers.
It’s the worst joke I ever heard!!!
this video and these discussions are straight out just stupid!
While I dont like that our great sport (and one of its gymnasts) had to be used in this piece of sattire, it makes a great point which is exactly what sattire is supposed to do. Sattire is a writing technique that uses exaggeration to reflect an aspect of society that needs to be changed. The exaggeration is that OBVIOUSLY shawns parents would not have put her to sleep because of a broken leg. Yet, that is what is commonly done to horses (hence all the horse references). Yes, I was slightly disturbed by the whole ‘shawn being euthenized” thing but overall the onion did a great job making its point about our societies treatment of life in general.
I feel that because this was done as a more serious ‘news cast’ that it’s in very poor taste.
If it was done Saturday Night style, then I suppose it would have been more humorous.
And I get the whole “freedom of speech” deal, but this seems like an abuse of what freedom of speech really means.
I think this discussion is even more enjoyable than the “offensive” video. Just Another Opinion, thank you for being able to verbalize so eloquently what so many of us have no doubt wanted to say all along.
that was absolutely friggin’ hilarious!
I thought it was funny.
Anyone who takes The Onion seriously…uh…well…they DO still offer Evaluation Sources classes right? Because they need to take one.
[...] Shawn Johnson Put To Sleep After Breaking Leg [...]
Imagine, were still allowed some adult humor in this world. “She had strong hindquarters” Classic.
**sarcasm** Though it could be absolutely devastating if the tweens on MySpace think Shawn actually died. The devastated childrens’ parents will have to sue The Onion for slander and libel**
This is not a “free speech” issue, at least not yet.
After all, the people who don’t like the video have as much right to express their opinions as the Onion does to put satirical videos on the Internet. “Free speech” isn’t freedom from criticism.
I haven’t heard any news the United States government is taking any action whatsoever against the Onion.
There are places even the Onion won’t go . Not because of free speech issues, but because doing so would most likely hit them right where it hurts – in the pocketbook. I highly doubt the Onion is going to be featuring Holocaust humor or jokes about cross burning on the White House lawn (although people exist that would find both of those things side slappingly funny).
For the record, I wouldn’t put the Shawn video in the same league as the above examples. It’s pretty obvious the target of the satire was gymnastics, not some wish for Shawn Johnson to get hurt.
If people don’t like it, don’t watch it.
Ono, a quick search on the Onion’s page reveals 138 Holocaust references in their articles:
http://www.theonion.com/content/search/onion/advanced?search=holocaust&restrict=
I could only find a handful of references for cross burning though.
So I maintain my position: there is nothing the Onion considers off-limits.
Monica: seriously?!
There is no such thing as an abuse of freedom of speech. And if there were, this would not be close to qualifying. You are overreacting.
And who doesn’t know that the Onion isn’t laden with made up satirical stories? People don’t take it any more seriously than SNL.
I am concluding that people have no sense of humor about gymnasts. If you don’t believe me, check out the Gilda Radner video where she parodies Nadia.
Actually, I’m not surprised. And some of it was actually funny.
But it’s a safe bet they won’t do anything about cross burning on the White House lawn.
Most of the stuff in the Onion is funny.
I didn’t find the Shawn thing funny. That doesn’t make the people who thought it was hilarious evil people OR waaay cooler than us nerds who just don’t get it.
Not everyone has the same sense of humor.
[...] They are harassed by stalkers. And are the butt of jokes by the Onion. [...]
[...] A funny rebuttal to: Shawn Johnson Put To Sleep After Breaking Leg [...]
I’m glad other people set the record straight on Katrina’s hilarious claim that this video is “possible grounds for slander/libel.”
I hate to be an asshole on the internet, but retards like Katrina are the reason we see polls indicating a majority of the country thinks the government should have control over the media, or that movie, TV and video game companies are responsible for how kids act, not their parents.
We live in a country where people can rattle off the names of their favorite American Idol or Survivor contestants, or talk for hours about what happened this season on The Hills, but most people cannot name their congressman, articulate why they support certain candidates, or tell you what the Appropriations Committee is and why it’s so critical in our government.
And that’s how we get people like Katrina, who’s willing to throw free speech under the bus as soon as one of her favorite celebrities becomes the butt of a joke.
Our country’s been doing parody since American Revolutionaries began printing screeds against the British, and the Supreme Court has acknowledged that history with its decisions.
There are the usual libel precedents — you have to prove genuine malice, and it’s much harder for public figures to prove libel than it is for regular people — but parody has its own special set of considerations under the law, chief among them whether any “reasonable person” would mistake the parody for the real thing.
In other words, the court says if most people who have even half a brain cell can recognize a parody when they see it, it doesn’t qualify as libel or slander. Whether we should be worried because so many idiots thought the Onion video was real is another topic for another discussion. But slander and libel it ain’t.
Leave a Comment