In a landmark defamation case, a jury has delivered a resounding blow to CNN, awarding Navy veteran Zachary Young $5 million in compensatory damages. The verdict stems from a 2021 segment that accused Young of unethical behavior during the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. The jury’s decision is just the beginning, with punitive damages still under consideration—a development that could further deepen the financial wound for the embattled network.
The controversy began with a segment aired on The Lead with Jake Tapper, which discussed the challenges Afghans faced fleeing the Taliban during the Biden administration’s disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. CNN highlighted allegations of black-market operations and exorbitant fees charged for evacuation assistance. The report prominently featured Zachary Young, implying he was a key figure in these dubious activities.
Young, a Navy veteran, filed a lawsuit in June 2022, asserting that the segment was misleading and severely damaged his reputation. According to the lawsuit, CNN portrayed him as a profiteer exploiting desperate Afghans, despite having no solid evidence to back up the claims.
As the trial unfolded, text messages revealed a chilling agenda within CNN’s ranks. Journalist Alex Marquardt, tasked with reporting on the story, sent a message to the network’s senior vice president of news, Adam Levine, stating, “We gonna nail this Zachary Young mf**ker.” The text, along with other communications, painted a picture of CNN executives determined to find a scapegoat for their Afghanistan corruption narrative, regardless of the truth.
The network’s internal drive to sensationalize the story backfired spectacularly in court. Judge William Scott Henry, who presided over the trial, admonished CNN’s attorney, David Axelrod, for his conduct, suggesting he owed Young an apology for labeling him a liar in court.
The $5 million in compensatory damages is a harsh blow for CNN, a network already struggling with declining revenue and plummeting viewership. The jury’s upcoming decision on punitive damages could compound the financial and reputational damage.
CNN’s troubles extend beyond the courtroom. The network has been hemorrhaging viewers for years, a trend that worsened after the 2024 presidential election. Following President Donald J. Trump’s landslide victory, CNN’s prime-time viewership reportedly dropped by 13%. In May 2024, the network hit a three-decade low in its prime-time audience numbers.
The verdict against CNN further tarnishes its reputation as a credible news source. Critics have long accused the network of prioritizing sensationalism over factual reporting, and this case only fuels those accusations.
For Young, the verdict is not just about money—it’s about restoring his name and holding CNN accountable for its reckless reporting. The damage to his reputation and business was significant, but the jury’s decision represents a step toward vindication.
“This isn’t just a win for me; it’s a win for everyone who values truth and integrity in journalism,” Young said in a statement following the verdict.
This case is the latest in a series of missteps for CNN, which has faced numerous accusations of biased and unethical reporting in recent years. The network’s willingness to target individuals like Young raises serious questions about its journalistic standards.
Critics argue that CNN’s behavior in this case exemplifies a broader problem within mainstream media—prioritizing sensationalism and political agendas over truth and accountability. For a network that once prided itself on hard-hitting journalism, the fallout from this case is a stark reminder of how far it has fallen.
As CNN awaits the jury’s decision on punitive damages, the network must confront its growing credibility crisis. With viewership at historic lows and public trust eroding, the road to recovery looks increasingly steep.
This verdict is not just a financial blow—it’s a wake-up call for CNN to reassess its priorities and recommit to responsible journalism. Whether the network heeds that call or continues its descent into sensationalism remains to be seen.
For now, the $5 million verdict and the potential for even higher punitive damages serve as a stark warning to media outlets everywhere: Reckless reporting has consequences. And in this case, those consequences have left CNN reeling.