Media Research Center writer Nicholas Fondacaro got a lot of mileage out of his junket to Florida to collude with attorneys and their client, Zachary Young, in his defamation lawsuit against CNN, which he hyperbolically promoted as being worth $1 billion though was ultimately awarded just $5 million. Yound is determined to milk the defamation narrative for more cash — and Fondacaro is more than happy to continue as his PR representative.
First, though, came a March 27 post in which he cheered the VA secretary for bringing it up in an attempt to avoid answering questions about Pete Hegseth’s Signal scandal (which thte MRC has mostly ignored):
For the first time on CNN since the ruling came out in January, CNN viewers finally got an inkling of the fact that the network was found liable for malicious defamation of Navy veteran Zachary Young. No, it wasn’t because the network finally decided to be open an honest with their viewers; it was because Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins demanded answers on behalf of “one of my veterans” on Wednesday night. His insistence on getting answers left The Source host, Kaitlan Collins bewildered.
[…]Kaitlan desperately tried to deflect away from the truth that Doug spoke. “Well, Mr. Secretary, respectfully, my question was about whether or not you, as a member of the Cabinet use this,” she tried to say, but Doug kept pressing.
Possibly a Freudian slip for how CNN thinks themselves authority figures, Kaitlan bizarrely described their conversation as her “investigation.” “And respectfully, I’m conducting the investigation. And I do have a lot of questions for you, on Veterans Affairs. But I don’t think it would be unwarranted to ask if you as a member of the Cabinet [use Signal],” she huffed.
That holier-than-thou attitude was part of what got CNN in trouble with the Bay County, Florida jury.
When Young saw visions of dollar signs by suing another media outlet, Fondacaro was his stenographer in a March 28 post:
After successfully winning a consequential defamation suit against CNN in January, Navy veteran Zachary Young has media-industry publication Puck News in his sights. According to a complaint filed in Bay County, Florida’s 14th Judicial Circuit on Friday, and exclusively obtained by NewsBusters, Young accused left-leaning Puck News, via the reporting of “entertainment law expert” Eriq Gardner, of choosing to “repeat and spread the false claims of CNN.”
The alleged defamation stemmed from Gardner’s December 10, 2024 article with Young accusing Puck of uncritically parroting CNN’s defamatory claims as fact[.] […]
Even after a jury of CNN and Young’s peers found the former liable for malicious defamation and awarded Young $5 million (with an undisclosed settlement on punitive damages), the complaint argued Gardner insisted Young’s case didn’t have merit and he only won because of the venue.
According to Gardner: “Late Friday, after a weeklong trial, CNN settled with Zachary Young, the Navy veteran spotlighted in a 2021 exposé on bad actors profiting from aiding Afghans escaping the Taliban… CNN’s real problem was geographical: the trial was set in Panama City, one of Florida’s deepest-red outposts.”
He also suggested the case was just another of instance of “Republican-appointed judges…greenlighting a surge of defamation cases.” “This is intended to convey that Mr. Young’s suit is frivolous or meritless, advanced because of political allies and sympathetic Republican judges. The entire gist of the article is that these types of suits are not credible and are only gaining traction due to politics,” Young said via the complaint.
It apparently wasn’t explained how Young’s decision to sue Puck was not a fulfillment of Gardner’s suggestion that his win in the CNN case emboldened his decision to sue more outlets.
A couple weeks later, Young seemed to further fulfill that prophecy by suing another media outlet, and of course Fondacaro was there to gush in an April 11 post:
In a Friday filing with Florida’s 14th Judicial Circuit in Bay County, Navy veteran Zachary Young filed a defamation suit against the Associated Press for making similar claims against him which led to CNN being found liable for malicious defamation. The complaint pointed out that the AP used similar rhetoric against Young that they used for criminal conduct and that they refused to publish “any retraction or correction.”
According to the filing, exclusively obtained by NewsBusters, “AP blatantly accused Mr. Young of engaging in criminal human smuggling” [emphasis added in the document].
The filing argues that the AP’s reporting falsely suggested that Young was committing a felony under United States federal law:
[…]The complaint presented three counts against the AP: defamation per se, defamation by implication, and trade libel. Young was requesting a “trial by jury” for damages “to be determined.”
Fondacaro chortled in an April 14 post that “U.S. News and World Report retracted their republication of the offending AP article, upon Young’s request.” That was followed by an April 16 post sneering that the AP responded to Young’s lawsuit:
The liberal media love to portray themselves as the sole gatekeepers of truth and facts; and when they get called out for getting things wrong, they get very testy and indignant. The Associated Press flashed that attitude in a letter to Navy veteran Zachary Young, and in recent comments about the defamation suit against them (after they falsely claimed Young was engaged in “human smuggling” in Afghanistan). Young cited the AP’s comments in a recent motion for punitive damages.
Patrick Maks, the AP’s director of media relations and corporate communications, wrote off the lawsuit in comments made to left-leaning Newsweek on Friday:
[…]“AP’s story was a factual and accurate report on the jury verdict finding in Zachary Young’s favor,” Patrick Maks, director of media relations and corporate communications at the Associated Press, told Newsweek on Friday. “We will vigorously defend our reporting against this frivolous lawsuit.”
The AP’s letter also pushed back on Young’s argument that the report’s phrasing implied criminality on his part. “That is simply unreasonable in the context of the Article as whole. Literally, in the first sentence of the Article explains that Mr. Young’s activities consisted of “help[ing] rescue endangered Afghans” (emphasis added),” they wrote.
Appearing to angle that Young was no longer a private citizen but rather a limited purpose public figure because of the CNN trial, the AP’s letter cited Young’s interviews with media outlets post-verdict. Their citations included NewsBusters’ interview with Young.
Yes, the AP is citing Fondacaro’s own softball interview with Young as evidence his claims have no merit.
But despite U.S. News removing the AP story, Young sued them anyway — which of course, Fondacaro eagerly wrote about in an April 24 article. Two days later, Fondacaro hyped just how much Young was looking to cash in on the AP lawsuit:
In a Friday Notice of Filing, Navy veteran Zachary Young notified Florida’s 14th Judicial Circuit in Bay County, that he would be seeking upwards of $453 million in damages through his defamation suit against The Associated Press. The wire service allegedly falsely accused Young of committing a felony while rescuing nearly two dozen women and a baby from Afghanistan.
“Based on the severity and scope of The Associated Press’s defamatory conduct, the foreseeable and actual harm caused, and the willful nature of the publication, Plaintiffs in good faith estimate their total damages to be no less than $450,000,000, subject to amendment following discovery,” Young’s filing argued.
Young was seeking damages on four fronts: economic loss, reputational harm, emotional distress, and Punitive damages. In total, Young was looking to be awarded between $373 – $453 million.
Fondacaro buried the fact that “Young was awarded $5 million ($4 million in economic and $1 million in emotional damages),” then quickly added that “CNN and Young then settled on punitive damages for an undisclosed amount.”
Fondacaro returned to whine in a May 21 post that the AP “requested that the court dismiss the case,” arguing that “Florida courts have long favored early adjudication of meritless defamation claims in order to protect First Amendment values” and pointing out that “The clear and unmistakably message of the Article is positive toward Young” (emphasis used in the filing). Fondacaro did not dispute any of the AP’s filing.