The revelation of how production is accomplished in their stories was fascinating. I have seen this before with network news. It's very similar to Hollywood. Lighting, posing, staging multiple takes splicing editing. It's an art. A story is fashioned and created and massaged. Early in the process it's planned and schemed and witnesses are set up. Tell one witness one thing and another another thing. People think when they see an interview on network news it's just a spontaneous interview. It's so incredibly deceptive. I once did a commercial years ago for a pizza chain as an amateur. I was there for 6 hours to yield 30 seconds of film.
5:18:07 I fail to see anything nefarious or bad faith about any of this. CNN is wrong for characterizing Zach as a bad actor. CNN wanted him to be a bad guy so they wrote their story that way regardless of what they found out.
@@bevrichards993. No problem. Unobjective jurors are dismissed during jury selection, so the positive side is you wouldn't have to sit through the whole trial.
@CNN editors and producers should lose their job so they can know what it feels like to ruin someone’s career on false news! What they did was disgusting.
Clear by the email exchange that Marquadt had already passed his judgment and decided Mr. Taylor was the target for his themed report. This is the guy he selected to take down. To stop, to do damage to, to from his perspective, expose, Wasn't accusing him of doing anything illegal? But wanted to take him down. Wanted to hurt him because he thought he deserved to be hurt right? So the defense is strengthening the prosecutions required element of malice. Fantastic job of making the plaintiff's case for them. The message says we're going to get this mother f***** . On the stand he spends all of his gravitas. saying oh no I didn't have anything against him. Honestly, CNN is so egotistically inflated that they think they can just speak away contradictions. We need a new vocabulary word reporter splaining. Now he's openly admitting to his plan to ambush him on tape. Talk him into talking off the record. Another ambush strategy. It's giving the person the false assurance you won't use the information revealed against them. They won't quote it but they'll use the information against you. They might even leak it to another journalist who's cooperating. Then that journalist can say it came from anonymous source + refuse to reveal the source. Didn't want to shut him down that translates to you. Didn't want to let him know you were targetting him and after his throat. Wanted to have a better understanding BS you wanted to get more incriminating statements.
Marquartt is amusing at times listening to his rationalizations for his reporting. Looking to pull on heartstrings isn't emotional manipulation of your audience. It's so accepted by his colleagues he has lost touch with real journalism. They have even adopted drama lingo in their productions.. what am I going to hear next, enter stage left protagonist speaking in a distressed voice.
Yeah, cause the story of the American government using the Afghan people and then leaving them to die isn't important. That should have been the focus of the piece. But we don't have journalists anymore. 😢
That blonde guy CNN presentor was asked a question by a juror "Did you investigate any companies" he waffles for nearly 10min and didn't answer the question Wow!
According to Network Spot CNN is worth 10 billion so at worst Zach could be awarded $9 billion at least and best have CNN sell everything for the full $10 billion
My gosh I thought he would never stop talking . This guy can self-promote for 24 hours straight. He talks for a living and he lives for talking. He's a master manipulator.
This was a hit piece and CNN knew it. This Navy Seal was managing other operators in the country literally saving people and they said because he wouldn't and couldn't take money directly for Afghans he was a bad guy. He couldn't it was illegal. They needed a sponsor for him to do anything.
The guy was never a SEAL - he failed his training, was sent to Iceland for about a year and half on a desk job, and then discharged from service. Just another one of the lies he told.
He didn't set foot in Afghanistan. He took money from their families or sponsors in the US. He never could take money from the people directly because they couldn't afford to pay his high prices. He was taking 2/3 of the money for himself off the top.
You must have not watched CNN lawyer's cross of all of the Plaintiff's witnesses last week. He wiped the floor with them. Seriously, go watch it. I'm just speaking of the lawyer skills. Unmatched.
Marquardt, who is the witness for the defense obviously, turns out to be the best witness for the plaintiff. This is how cases are won. By demonstrating inconsistency in the testimony. It is not hard for an objective viewer to see why an objective juror would find for the plaintiff. Cnn didn't simply make a mistake in their report. They had a storyline which they pursued and they shoehorned Zach into that narrative. They didn't personally hate him originally, but he was an expendable scapegoat for their narrative story. Saying things on the stand which are inconsistent with your previous deposition are also an excellent way to impeach your testimony. Fans of CNN may regret that they lost the case, but they lost it by testimony inconsistent to evidence already admitted.
No one has verified he got anyone out of country. Bloomberg would not say it was true. Why would Audible even be there? After all the other lies the guy has told, who even knows if getting the 5 people out was true? Afghan citizens were helping get people out for FREE, so what was this guy's big expense?
No, he seems to be "looking for info," as said in many texts, disregarding anything else they said, that fit his narrative, not, "talking to as many people as he can." It didn't organically change, it stayed the same. This is evident to be contrary to his narrative.
He maybe looking for information he wasn’t giving the man time to respond, he didn’t check out his credentials, he did ruin his credibility he didn’t check endanger peoples lives, the man did work for the CIA these were extraordinarily reckless and do the math someone somewhere is probably dead rightnow because of these people because they took this guy offline, these people are reprehensible.
What an evil journalist. "Nothing he can do to help afghans apart from tell their story," meanwhile via his slander he actively removed a route for afghans to escape. He is profiting from Afghans while harming them and Young, meanwhile Young was profiting from Afghans while helping them. What an evil guy
Because @CNN is shady with this story they had a vindictive point of view and went after ZY. Why did everyone else in the story get to be anonymous and have their names and faces obscured, yet CNN totally doxed ZY even to the point where they revealed where he was living? What they did was appalling for a so called ‘news’ corporation.
You know he said a couple of true things about credibility so he's not ignorant as to why his credibility is so damaged and why the credibility of his network is so damaged.
Why didn't the journalist go help them then for free then? Insont know much about this, but common sense that it would be hard and expensive to get someone out. Why didn't the administration get them pit? Why didn't he do a piece on that? The whole thing seems off...
I actually am on Zachary's side. I don't like the guy, but it seems CNN did a hit piece on him. And Marquardt was lying like crazy on the stand, IMO. I need to go listen to judge instructions first though.
@@belleslettres354 It doesn't matter if they quoted him when it's framed out of context and in such a way as to present a false narrative. Which is what they did. They did it deliberately and with malice.
Why is this pip squeak, obnoxious, Plantiff attorney allowed to bully witnesses and plain ole flat out lie in front of the jury? His voice has not even fully changed yet. He sounds ridiculous when he starts throwing out his word salad. Not to mention the acting he is doing. What TV lawyer is he trying to emulate.
Zach Young’s attorney is so embarrassing to watch. He thinks this is his big Oscar winning gotcha performance. Alex Marquardt did a great job staying calm, made him seem even more unhinged (and I was totally undecided before today)
I have a rhetoric crush on CNN's lawyer. I don't know what he looks like and am waiting until after the trial to find out! He's wiping the floor with the plaintiffs.
The revelation of how production is accomplished in their stories was fascinating. I have seen this before with network news. It's very similar to Hollywood. Lighting, posing, staging multiple takes splicing editing. It's an art. A story is fashioned and created and massaged. Early in the process it's planned and schemed and witnesses are set up. Tell one witness one thing and another another thing. People think when they see an interview on network news it's just a spontaneous interview. It's so incredibly deceptive. I once did a commercial years ago for a pizza chain as an amateur. I was there for 6 hours to yield 30 seconds of film.
5:18:07 I fail to see anything nefarious or bad faith about any of this. CNN is wrong for characterizing Zach as a bad actor. CNN wanted him to be a bad guy so they wrote their story that way regardless of what they found out.
I see this exactly the opposite of what you see.
CNN created a straw man to attack. Unfortunately they should have made the person anonymous if they were going to embellish like that.
@@bevrichards993. No problem. Unobjective jurors are dismissed during jury selection, so the positive side is you wouldn't have to sit through the whole trial.
This guy was actually promoted. Completely lied on the stand.
Zak is a patriot and a hero, and he deserves to win big. I hope his life gets back on track after this.
@CNN editors and producers should lose their job so they can know what it feels like to ruin someone’s career on false news! What they did was disgusting.
Clear by the email exchange that Marquadt had already passed his judgment and decided Mr. Taylor was the target for his themed report. This is the guy he selected to take down. To stop, to do damage to, to from his perspective, expose, Wasn't accusing him of doing anything illegal? But wanted to take him down. Wanted to hurt him because he thought he deserved to be hurt right? So the defense is strengthening the prosecutions required element of malice. Fantastic job of making the plaintiff's case for them. The message says we're going to get this mother f***** . On the stand he spends all of his gravitas. saying oh no I didn't have anything against him. Honestly, CNN is so egotistically inflated that they think they can just speak away contradictions. We need a new vocabulary word reporter splaining. Now he's openly admitting to his plan to ambush him on tape. Talk him into talking off the record. Another ambush strategy. It's giving the person the false assurance you won't use the information revealed against them. They won't quote it but they'll use the information against you. They might even leak it to another journalist who's cooperating. Then that journalist can say it came from anonymous source + refuse to reveal the source. Didn't want to shut him down that translates to you. Didn't want to let him know you were targetting him and after his throat. Wanted to have a better understanding BS you wanted to get more incriminating statements.
One would think that if ANYONE knows how to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question, it would be a journalist…
they know the best and they still lie
Marquartt is amusing at times listening to his rationalizations for his reporting. Looking to pull on heartstrings isn't emotional manipulation of your audience. It's so accepted by his colleagues he has lost touch with real journalism. They have even adopted drama lingo in their productions.. what am I going to hear next, enter
stage left protagonist
speaking in a distressed voice.
Of course, Marquat has a deep appreciation for an attempt at creating scandal. He is obviously an expert at that.
This shows that @alexandermarquardt is a liar. He should be taken off air it is quite revolting, he ‘hunted down’ Zachary Young and ruined his life.
Yeah, cause the story of the American government using the Afghan people and then leaving them to die isn't important. That should have been the focus of the piece. But we don't have journalists anymore. 😢
Great point.
At best, that CNN "reporter" lost his objectivity. More likely he never had any.
That blonde guy CNN presentor was asked a question by a juror "Did you investigate any companies" he waffles for nearly 10min and didn't answer the question Wow!
Add sanctimonious to that description.
According to Network Spot CNN is worth 10 billion so at worst Zach could be awarded $9 billion at least and best have CNN sell everything for the full $10 billion
Well it's not their money like in the Mia lawsuit their insurance ends up paying. Then they only get a portion until after all the appeals.
I don’t why CNN took this to trial.
My gosh I thought he would never stop talking
. This guy can self-promote for 24 hours straight. He talks for a living and he lives for talking. He's a master manipulator.
He was incredibly sanctimonious also.
This was a hit piece and CNN knew it. This Navy Seal was managing other operators in the country literally saving people and they said because he wouldn't and couldn't take money directly for Afghans he was a bad guy. He couldn't it was illegal. They needed a sponsor for him to do anything.
He wasn't in Afghanistan, he was sitting in his house in Austria.
@jjj-z3t4j . So no one went to Afghanistan and risked their lives to rescue people?
He wasn’t in Afghanistan at the time! He was in his home in Austria!
The guy was never a SEAL - he failed his training, was sent to Iceland for about a year and half on a desk job, and then discharged from service. Just another one of the lies he told.
He didn't set foot in Afghanistan. He took money from their families or sponsors in the US. He never could take money from the people directly because they couldn't afford to pay his high prices. He was taking 2/3 of the money for himself off the top.
I thought ZY attorney was phenomenal especially on redirect.
He actually kinda sucked and showed his inexperience as a trial lawyer.
You must have not watched CNN lawyer's cross of all of the Plaintiff's witnesses last week. He wiped the floor with them. Seriously, go watch it. I'm just speaking of the lawyer skills. Unmatched.
Everyone gets paid to do their job just like cnn reporters do. I thought that was a great point to be made. What exactly did ZY do wrong?
@@covert_ops_47 Yes, love it when his voice starts squeaking. Has he been through puberty yet?
Marquardt, who is the witness for the defense obviously, turns out to be the best witness for the plaintiff. This is how cases are won. By demonstrating inconsistency in the testimony. It is not hard for an objective viewer to see why an objective juror would find for the plaintiff. Cnn didn't simply make a mistake in their report. They had a storyline which they pursued and they shoehorned Zach into that narrative. They didn't personally hate him originally, but he was an expendable scapegoat for their narrative story. Saying things on the stand which are inconsistent with your previous deposition are also an excellent way to impeach your testimony. Fans of CNN may regret that they lost the case, but they lost it by testimony inconsistent to evidence already admitted.
ZY is not very likable but it seems pretty clear that CNN went after him and didn’t care that he did actually get people out of the country.
No one has verified he got anyone out of country. Bloomberg would not say it was true. Why would Audible even be there? After all the other lies the guy has told, who even knows if getting the 5 people out was true? Afghan citizens were helping get people out for FREE, so what was this guy's big expense?
No, he seems to be "looking for info," as said in many texts, disregarding anything else they said, that fit his narrative, not, "talking to as many people as he can." It didn't organically change, it stayed the same. This is evident to be contrary to his narrative.
He maybe looking for information he wasn’t giving the man time to respond, he didn’t check out his credentials, he did ruin his credibility he didn’t check endanger peoples lives, the man did work for the CIA these were extraordinarily reckless and do the math someone somewhere is probably dead rightnow because of these people because they took this guy offline, these people are reprehensible.
Man 150 million is not enough.
What an evil journalist. "Nothing he can do to help afghans apart from tell their story," meanwhile via his slander he actively removed a route for afghans to escape. He is profiting from Afghans while harming them and Young, meanwhile Young was profiting from Afghans while helping them. What an evil guy
This makes CNN look very shady
The plaintiff attorney looks the shadiest right behind the plaintiff himself.
Because @CNN is shady with this story they had a vindictive point of view and went after ZY. Why did everyone else in the story get to be anonymous and have their names and faces obscured, yet CNN totally doxed ZY even to the point where they revealed where he was living? What they did was appalling for a so called ‘news’ corporation.
Duh...
Cnn horrible should be found liable..
You know he said a couple of true things about credibility so he's not ignorant as to why his credibility is so damaged and why the credibility of his network is so damaged.
Why didn't the journalist go help them then for free then? Insont know much about this, but common sense that it would be hard and expensive to get someone out. Why didn't the administration get them pit? Why didn't he do a piece on that? The whole thing seems off...
Off topic.. the amount of ads is insane
I think CNN could be found liable but the damages awarded will be substantially reduced
What happened to kast witness Amen Cone
Omg those plaintiff lawyers are SOOOO bad. It's so cringe.
What are you, 12?
I was thinking the same thing! Who referred them to Young! Horrible!
The lead is an utter prat.
Jury will find for the defendants, as they should, and we'll all agree this was a huge waste of time
I actually am on Zachary's side. I don't like the guy, but it seems CNN did a hit piece on him. And Marquardt was lying like crazy on the stand, IMO. I need to go listen to judge instructions first though.
@cocatfan Name anything they said in the story that wasn't directly pulled from his own words or actions
@@cocatfanyou obviously haven't been watching the trial? There's absolutely nothing false in the media pieces they did. They literally quoted him.
@@cocatfan 💯
@@belleslettres354 It doesn't matter if they quoted him when it's framed out of context and in such a way as to present a false narrative. Which is what they did. They did it deliberately and with malice.
Why is this pip squeak, obnoxious, Plantiff attorney allowed to bully witnesses and plain ole flat out lie in front of the jury? His voice has not even fully changed yet. He sounds ridiculous when he starts throwing out his word salad. Not to mention the acting he is doing. What TV lawyer is he trying to emulate.
Plaintiff’s lawyer is extremely insufferable. He actually thinks they have something here.. the posturing is just awful.
Zach Young’s attorney is so embarrassing to watch. He thinks this is his big Oscar winning gotcha performance. Alex Marquardt did a great job staying calm, made him seem even more unhinged (and I was totally undecided before today)
I have a rhetoric crush on CNN's lawyer. I don't know what he looks like and am waiting until after the trial to find out! He's wiping the floor with the plaintiffs.
Alex stayed calm but I found him dishonest in many statements. Zach's attorney did great.
@@cocatfan 💯
@@cocatfan Did not hear any dishonest statements from him.
Agreed. He was smug and cocky. He sure didn't help ZY's case today.
Friedmann is a wannabee tryhard grandstander