WWE Vs. Journal Inquirer Round 3
by CTNewsjunkie Staff | Jun 27, 2012 7:52pm
(1) Comment | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Congress, Courts, Election 2012, Legal
It took several weeks, but World Wrestling Entertainment responded Wednesday to the Journal Inquirer’s Federal Election Commission complaint alleging that the Stamford-based entertainment company assisted Republican U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon’s campaign.
In a statement the WWE said the newspaper’s complaint was an “abuse of process.” It went on to describe as “absurd” the newspaper’s allegation that WWE’s threat of a lawsuit had a chilling effect on the media’s first amendment rights.
“It was done self-servingly to create a story that the Journal Inquirer was the first to report and in retaliation to WWE’s demand for a retraction of libelous statements,” the WWE said in a statement Wednesday. “Based on research, there has never been another single instance of a media company filing a complaint with the FEC against a private entity, let alone a complaint that irresponsibly seeks to involve the FEC in state libel law matters.”
Earlier this year, Journal Inquirer Managing Editor Chris Powell wrote that McMahon, the former WWE chief executive, derived her wealth from “the business of violence, pornography, and general raunch.”
The WWE shot back with a letter calling on Powell for a retraction and threatening legal action. In the letter, Senior Vice President for Marketing and Communications Brian Flinn said the comments were malicious and libelous.
Powell, who was unavailable for comment Wednesday evening, previously pointed out that he never mentioned the WWE by name in his column.
The newspaper felt that the letter was so threatening, the company filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission in early June. The WWE responded to the complaint on Wednesday.
Earlier this month on the campaign trail, McMahon said she hadn’t been aware of the saga involving her former company, which is currently headed by her husband, Vince. She said she would remain focused on what she was doing, which at the time was a “jobs tour.”
Click here to read our previous report.
Tags: Linda McMahon, Federal Elections Commission, WWE, libel, Chris Powell, Journal Inquirer, dh
Comment
posted by: Noteworthy | June 28, 2012 9:50am
As a former journalist often at odds with those in power and running for office, I usually side with my brethern. However, the WWE is absolutely correct in its FEC response.
The Journal-Inquirer and Chris Powell in particular went way out on a limb calling it a “business of violence, pornography and general raunch.” That he attempts to hide behind the rather small fig leaf that he didn’t identify the WWE by name, even though he was trashing its former CEO and her wealth derived from it just doesn’t pass the laugh test.
More importantly though is that Powell intentionally used words that directly and connotatively denigrated the WWE and McMahon in an attempt to alienate female voters. While I have never been of a fan of the WWE. its content has never been considered pornographic in any sense except in the most puritan, extreme context of Jerry Falwell or the 1600’s.
What is particularly troubling however, is that when facing the threat of a libel and defamation suit, Powell and the JI run to the federal government for protection and then use that to write another story about how the WWE is trying to chill public discourse while making a corporate contribution to the McMahon campaign. This is as novel as it is a silly, self-serving assertion. Is Powell really saying the WWE should not defend its business, its name that in Powell’s world of words puts it on the same level as Hustler and any of a myriad of real pornographic websites and bookstores? It’s patently absurd.
Moreover, the McMahon and the WWE could make the assertion that the JI and Powell are in fact using a possible FEC investigation to chill the candidacy of McMahon.
The JI should not cease to point out what it doesn’t like about McMahon or any other candidate or public official but it should choose its words wisely and keep its critiques focused on the candidate. A revision to what’s been published is also in order combined with a withdrawal of the FEC complaint which in the arena of problems the FEC has to deal with in an election year is little more than a gnat on the arse of an elephant.