CNN Found Liable for Defaming Veteran Zachary Young in Afghanistan Evacuation Story

The jury also said Young could recover additional punitive damages and will now decide how much that should be. Lawyers for CNN have said the troubled financial outlook for the news media business should factor into their calculations, as punitive damages are intended to sting but not destroy defendants.

The case—the latest in a spate of high-profile defamation lawsuits against major media organizations—centered on a five-minute segment that CNN first aired in November 2021 in the wake of the U.S.’s chaotic withdrawal.  

It told the plight of a California-based Afghan-American man who found people on Facebook offering to shepherd his family in Afghanistan to safety for $100,000. A headline on the screen read: “Afghans trying to flee Taliban face black markets, exorbitant fees, no guarantee of safety or success.” 

The latter half of the segment focused on Zachary Young, a 49-year-old Austria-based security and intelligence consultant who had stints in the U.S. Navy and the CIA. According to CNN’s story, Young posted messages on LinkedIn offering evacuations from Kabul to Pakistan for $75,000 a vehicle or $14,500-per-person flights to the United Arab Emirates.

The segment aired on CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper” and was narrated by its chief national security correspondent, Alex Marquardt. It included a response from Young saying that his services are for Afghans who have sponsors that can bear the costs. Young said he was notified that the segment was focusing on him about two hours before it aired and that he warned CNN that the story was defamatory. 

Young’s lawsuit, brought in June 2022, claimed that CNN made it seem like he was illegally preying on Afghans hunted by the Taliban. He said CNN didn’t make clear that his clients were nonprofits and corporations, including Bloomberg and Audible, and that his prices reflected complex evacuation logistics. 

Young testified at the trial that the story’s portrayal rendered him a pariah in his industry and sent him down a spiral of depression, sleeplessness and panic attacks.

CNN said it would wait until the damages phase of the trial was complete before commenting on the result. The network and its lawyers disputed during trial that the segment had said anything false about Young.

Young’s lawsuit is one of many defamation cases brought against media organizations in recent years. ABC News recently agreed to pay $15 million to settle a case filed by President-Elect Donald Trump. In 2023, Fox News paid $787.5 million to settle its legal battle with Dominion Voting Systems over claims that the network helped spread conspiracies about Dominion’s voting machines. Fox and The Wall Street Journal’s parent company, News Corp, share common ownership.

Taking the Young case to trial presented risks for CNN in an environment where media trust is eroding. 

“Jury trials can be a tough arena for the press, and it can be really harmful to the whole industry for a major media outlet to lose a high-profile defamation case,” said Sonja West, a University of Georgia law professor. “Sometimes even if they win, the headlines that come out of the trial can hurt the press in the public’s eye.” 

The jury announced its verdict after more than eight hours of deliberation. In holding CNN liable, the jury concluded that the network recklessly pursued the story and disparaged Young with false assertions. The jury also concluded that CNN set out to harm Young, finding that punitive damages were warranted.

During Thursday’s closing arguments, Young’s attorney, Devin Freedman, implored jurors to send a message about accountability and balance. “End this madness. Bring American journalism back to the center,” he said. “Bring Walter Cronkite back.”

Circuit Judge William Henry read written questions from jurors during the trial, exposing their concerns that CNN allowed predetermined judgments to shape stories. One asked CNN reporter Katie Bo Lillis whether the network treated Young as guilty until proven innocent. 

Internal CNN communications shared at trial showed correspondents and producers privately ridiculing Young. “We gonna nail this Zachary Young mf—ker,” Marquardt messaged a CNN employee more than a week before the segment aired. A producer wrote that Young had a “punchable face.”

Some CNN staffers expressed doubts about the story, including a digital editor who described an online version of the report as being “full of holes like Swiss cheese.”

Lyrissa Lidsky, a University of Florida law professor who focuses on defamation and free-speech law, said the verdict shows that jurors are less willing to give news media the benefit of the doubt.

Among the lessons from the litigation, she said: “If you have people on your team waving red flags, you probably should take that seriously.” 

Before jurors began assessing punitive damages, CNN attorney David Axelrod warned them that the higher the penalty, the less money CNN would have to cover natural disasters and global conflicts.

Freedman offered other guidance to the jury. “​This is not a slap-on-the-wrist type of situation,” he said.

Write to Jacob Gershman at jacob.gershman@wsj.com and Isabella Simonetti at isabella.simonetti@wsj.com