They won, but in the final section the judge had this to say:
“This decision grants summary judgment in favor of the Mother Jones Defendants. Even so, the Court finds Mother Jones’ reporting styles, and indeed the general trend in political journalism, troubling. The Court record and, in particular, [an email from Mother Jones reporter Stephanie Mencimer], illustrates Mother Jones’ determination to present a biased article by offering a skewed view of the Plaintiffs.…”
“Mother Jones describes its articles as ‘smart, fearless journalism,’ ‘ahead of the curve’ and ‘about reporting.’ Contrary to its perception of itself, this case illustrates the non-objective bias of Mother Jones and its approach in seeking out only the negative to support its position; resorting to sophomoric bullying and name-calling to lead the reader to adopt its particular agenda.”
“The Founders of this country expected that democracy would thrive only if the press was not hindered in its reporting upon the actions of government and the governors, James Madison, in 1825, wrote: ‘The diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty.’”
“But the journalistic model revealed to the Court in the record of this lawsuit is anything but a ‘guardian of true liberty.’ Instead, it is little more than mud-slinging, advertised as journalistic fearlessness, which offers very little in the way of a complete or balanced picture for its readers. Instead of being a leader in educating the people about civil discourse in an era of increased political polarization, the press in general, and Mother Jones in particular, leads the way in demonizing, rather than fairly discussing, those whose points of view differ from its own.”
So odd, because in the end, you could add the following:
"However, every single one of the Plaintiff's claims (that MJ was defamatory, libelous, derogatory or otherwise) is found to be without merit."
So, the accusation is that there is mud to be slung, and that the mud slung was accurate, just not balanced - and it's only MJ that might have an issue with portraying themselves as balanced, which, if problematic, reminds me only of a certain TV networks "Fair and Balanced" sloganeering.
Can they sue Vandersloot for legal fees? If this was a small magazine or newspaper, they wouldn't have had the resources to fight back and would've lost
Precisely the point (as raised by the article) - that individuals couldn't have fought this (indeed MJ covered another journalists legal costs when he was named as an individual defendant), and how Vandersloot avoided suing anyone with enough resources to fight back even more aggressively.
“This decision grants summary judgment in favor of the Mother Jones Defendants. Even so, the Court finds Mother Jones’ reporting styles, and indeed the general trend in political journalism, troubling. The Court record and, in particular, [an email from Mother Jones reporter Stephanie Mencimer], illustrates Mother Jones’ determination to present a biased article by offering a skewed view of the Plaintiffs.…”
“Mother Jones describes its articles as ‘smart, fearless journalism,’ ‘ahead of the curve’ and ‘about reporting.’ Contrary to its perception of itself, this case illustrates the non-objective bias of Mother Jones and its approach in seeking out only the negative to support its position; resorting to sophomoric bullying and name-calling to lead the reader to adopt its particular agenda.”
“The Founders of this country expected that democracy would thrive only if the press was not hindered in its reporting upon the actions of government and the governors, James Madison, in 1825, wrote: ‘The diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty.’”
“But the journalistic model revealed to the Court in the record of this lawsuit is anything but a ‘guardian of true liberty.’ Instead, it is little more than mud-slinging, advertised as journalistic fearlessness, which offers very little in the way of a complete or balanced picture for its readers. Instead of being a leader in educating the people about civil discourse in an era of increased political polarization, the press in general, and Mother Jones in particular, leads the way in demonizing, rather than fairly discussing, those whose points of view differ from its own.”