Business
Column: The climate scientist who just won a $1-million judgment against climate change deniers
One of the major issues confronting scientists today — especially those working in the heavily politicized fields of global warming, vaccines and the origin of COVID-19 — is how to deal with the torrents of misinformation and disinformation, some of it personal, pushing back against their work.
Climate scientist Michael E. Mann just found an answer. Sue the critics — and win.
Last week, a Washington, D.C., jury awarded Mann more than $1 million in punitive damages against two right-wing writers who had accused him of research fraud.
I hope this verdict sends a message that falsely attacking climate scientists is not protected speech.
— Climate scientist Michael Mann
The jurors didn’t appear to find this a close question. They ruled that the online posts written by Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn breached the legal standards applied to defamation lawsuits involving a public figure such as Mann — that their writings asserted facts that were “provably false” and that they knew or should have known that their assertions were false.
The jury awarded Mann $1 in compensatory damages from each defendant, plus $1,000 in punitive damages from Simberg and $1 million in punitive damages from Steyn. The verdicts capped a painful 12-year battle that Mann waged to protect his reputation from trolls questioning his integrity.
“I hope this verdict sends a message that falsely attacking climate scientists is not protected speech,” Mann said after the verdict.
There’s more to the case than the exoneration of a single scientist. The verdict scored a direct hit on personal attacks on scientists using innuendo and outright lies, all aimed at advancing partisan and economic ideologies by undermining scientific research.
“The attacks denigrating science and trying to undercut science, both for climate science and biomedicine, [are] not just about the science,” Peter Hotez, a leading authority on medicines and vaccines and a prominent foe of anti-science politics, told PBS.
“It’s now gone the next step to attack the scientists and portray us as public enemies,” said Hotez, who is collaborating with Mann on a book about the anti-science movement. “Both Michael and I are stalked regularly. We receive threats online, phone calls to the office, sometimes physical confrontations. So it’s gone out to that new level.”
Scientists working in all fields subjected to partisan critiques have lamented that the flow of lies about their work and about established science can be unrelenting.
The critics are financed by right-wing foundations and their claims repeated at congressional hearings — typically, these days, chaired by House Republicans aiming to pump conspiracy theories into the mainstream. Sometimes, as many targets have experienced, the criticism degenerates into personal threats and physical confrontations.
Much is at stake in these battles. Global warming is an elemental threat to life on Earth, and ignoring it as its deniers advocate is a recipe for extinction. Campaigns by anti-vaccine activists can cause sickness and death for untold millions in the U.S. and worldwide.
To understand Mann’s case, it helps to start at the beginning.
In 1998 and 1999, Mann and colleagues published two papers reporting that global temperatures, which had been stable for at least a millennium, began rising sharply during the 20th century and especially in the last 50 years. They used evidence from tree rings, sediment cores from oceans, caves and lakes and ice cores from glaciers to reconstruct climate patterns of the distant past.
The famous “hockey stick” graph developed by Michael Mann and colleagues showed average climate temperatures soaring sharply over the last century as burning of fossil fuels increased.
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)
The 1999 paper illustrated their findings with what became known as the “hockey stick” graph because it resembled that implement with a long horizontal shaft (the distant past) ending with a nearly upright blade (recent times).
Mann’s research and the graph drew immediate pushback from global warming deniers, who questioned his data and methodology. After 2009, when emails among climate scientists including Mann were hacked from the files of the University of East Anglia in Britain and cherry-picked to suggest that the scientists were manipulating their data, they also questioned his integrity.
The attacks on Mann should have been ended by a series of official investigations through 2021 that cleared him of research wrongdoing, including two by Pennsylvania State University, where Mann taught from 2005 to 2022, and another by the National Science Foundation.
In all, eight separate investigations by official bodies found Mann innocent of wrongdoing or validated his research findings; the results all were made public. But the attacks continued, even up to this day. (Mann is now at the University of Pennsylvania.)
That brings us to the noxious posts by Simberg and Steyn.
Simberg’s post, titled “The Other Scandal in Unhappy Valley,” was published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute on July 12, 2012 — after Mann had been cleared. It’s worth noting that the CEI is a free-enterprise think tank that has been funded by the Koch network, other far-right moneybags and the tobacco industry, and that global warming denial has been one of its favorite themes.
Simberg drew a connection between the scandal in the Penn State football program involving a cover-up of sexual molestations by Jerry Sandusky, an assistant coach, and the university’s purported “whitewash” of Mann’s hockey stick deceptions. (The headline referred to the nickname of Penn State’s scenic location, “Happy Valley.”)
“Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science,” Simberg wrote, “except for instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science.”
CEI has left Simberg’s post up on its website but has excised his references to Sandusky as “inappropriate.” However, the full post, including its original references to Sandusky, was reprinted in a 2016 decision by a Washington, D.C., court of appeals that allowed Mann’s case against the writers to proceed to trial.
Steyn followed Simberg’s post with his own, published in the conservative organ National Review on July 15.
While writing, apropos of Simberg’s Sandusky reference, that he was “not sure I’d have extended that metaphor all the way into the locker-room showers,” Steyn asserted that Simberg “has a point.” He called Mann’s hockey-stick graph “fraudulent.”
Steyn and Simberg both questioned the investigations that cleared Mann. Simberg noted that Penn State’s investigators were all tenured professors on its faculty. Steyn wrote, “If an institution is prepared to cover up systemic statutory rape of minors, what won’t it cover up?”
Simberg also referred disdainfully to a 2011 investigation by the National Science Foundation’s inspector general, which exonerated Mann, writing that it relied on information from Penn State and therefore was “not truly independent.”
A couple of points about that. First, Simberg wrote that the investigation was by the National Academy of Sciences, which is different from the NSF. (The NAS conducted its own investigation upholding Mann’s work, in 2006, but that’s not the one Simberg quoted.)
Second, the NSF’s office of inspector general specifically stated that in its investigation it did not rely on Penn State.
Rather, it examined “a substantial amount of publicly available documentation concerning both [Mann’s] research and parallel research conducted by his collaborators and other scientists” in the field of global warming, and also interviewed Mann, “critics, and disciplinary experts” before finding that there was no evidence that Mann “falsified or fabricated any data.”
National Review defended itself and Steyn’s column with the sort of vacuous braggadocio that is its stock in trade.
In a 2012 editorial headlined “Get Lost,” its editor, Rich Lowry, laughed off Mann’s threat to file a lawsuit by pledging that if Mann did so it would be pleased to engage in “extremely wide-ranging” discovery — “we will be doing more than fighting a nuisance lawsuit; we will be embarking on a journalistic project of great interest to us and our readers.”
In any event, National Review turned tail and ran. It persuaded the D.C. court to drop it from Mann’s lawsuit in 2021 by pleading that Steyn wasn’t its employee but merely an “independent contractor” and that none of its employees had reviewed his posting until it was published on its website, which it portrayed as sort of a neutral landing place for posts to appear. That “journalistic project of great interest”? Fugeddaboutit.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute also got itself dismissed from Mann’s lawsuit in 2021 via a similar argument that a judge described as “an assertion of ignorance”: It said Simberg wasn’t its employee and that the low-level employee who did review his article before it posted checked it only for “formatting error and typos,” not for content.
National Review continued to ridicule Mann. In January, as the trial against the writers began in a D.C. courtroom, it labeled Mann “a darling of fashionable opinion,” placed his case in the category of “runaway snowflakery” and called it “laughably weak.” (Whoops.) Given the publication’s court-ordered immunization against liability, it appeared to be taking on the role of a bully who goads others into waging battle with the words, “Let’s you and him fight.”
Now that the verdict is in, National Review is wrapping itself in the U.S. Constitution. It editorialized that a few blocks from the courthouse, “at the National Archives Museum, the 1st Amendment faded a little on its parchment.”
It asserted that Mann won the $1-million verdict merely for a blog post that did no more than “ruffle [his] feathers.” It charged that Mann’s “mendacity and egomania” motivated his lawsuit.
“Ultimately, this lawsuit is not about Mark Steyn or about conservative magazines or about climate change,” National Review wrote, “but about the integrity of free speech in these United States.”
The truth is, however, that Steyn and Simberg lost only after the jury applied the most stringent standards for defamation lawsuits — standards that have been developed precisely to protect “the integrity of free speech” and that protect serious journalism. Mann had to show that the authors knew or should have known that their factual assertions about his work were false, and that’s exactly what he did.
The lesson embodied in the jury award is not that you can’t smear or defame your targets. The jury didn’t rule that you can’t express an opinion about them or their work in the course of robust debate.
What it did rule, and it isn’t alone in honoring this principle, is that you can’t smear them by parading lies and misrepresentations as though they’re facts — not without paying a price.
That may be a frightful lesson for National Review and other publications like it, but it should be comforting for the rest of us.
The highest gas prices in the country are making it tougher for some gig drivers to make a living.
Gas prices have shot up amid the war in the Middle East. On average, California gas prices are the most expensive in the United States, according to data from the American Automobile Assn. The average price of regular gas in California is almost $6. The national average is a little above $4.
While Uber and Lyft drivers have concocted clever ways to cut gas consumption, they say that without some relief they will be forced to leave the ride-hailing business.
John Mejia was already struggling to make money as a part-time Lyft driver when soaring gas prices made his side hustle even harder.
“Unfortunately, it’s the economics of paying less to drivers and gas prices,” he said. “It actually is pulling people out of the business.”
Guests at The Westin St. Francis hotel get into an Uber.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Gig work offers drivers the freedom to work for themselves and more flexibility, but being independent contractors also means they must shoulder unexpected costs.
Ride-sharing companies say they’re trying to help, but drivers say the gas relief comes with caveats. For now, drivers say they’re being pickier about what rides they accept, cutting hours and are looking at other ways to make money.
Mejia, who started driving for Lyft more than a decade ago, said in his early days, he would sometimes make $400 in three hours. Now it takes 12 hours to rake in $200.
The San Francisco Bay Area consultant is an active member of the California Gig Workers Union, so he knows he isn’t alone. California has more than 800,000 gig rideshare drivers, according to the group, which is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union.
On social media sites such as Reddit and Facebook, gig workers have posted about how the higher gas prices are eating into their earnings. Among the tricks they are suggesting: reducing the number of times the ignition is turned on or off, avoiding traffic, working in specific neighborhoods and at times with high demand and switching to electric vehicles.
Gig drivers usually have only seconds to decide whether to accept a ride on the app, but they have become more strategic about which rides and deliveries they accept.
That means they are more likely to sit back in their cars and wait for higher fares for quick pick-up and drop-off.
“I highly recommend the ‘decline and recline’ strategy, rejecting unprofitable rides until a better one appears,” wrote Sergio Avedian, a driver, in the popular blog the Rideshare Guy.
Pedestrians cross the street in front of a Lyft and Uber driver on Wednesday. High gas prices have made it hard for gig drivers to make a living, cutting into their profits.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Uber, Lyft and other companies have unveiled several ways to help drivers save on gas.
Uber said drivers can get up to 15% cash back through May 26 with the Uber Pro card, a business debit Mastercard for drivers and couriers. Based on a worker’s tier, they can get up to $1 off per gallon of gas through Upside — an app that offers cash rewards — and up to 21 cents off per gallon of gas with Shell Fuel Rewards. The company also offers incentives for drivers who want to switch to electric vehicles.
“We know the price of gas is top of mind for many rideshare and delivery drivers across the country right now,” Uber said in a blog post about its gas savings efforts.
Lyft also said it’s expanding gas relief through May 26 because the company knows that the extra cost “hits hardest for drivers who depend on driving for their income.”
The company is offering more cash back, depending on the driver’s tier, for drivers who use a Lyft Direct business debit card to pay for gas at eligible gas stations. They can get an additional 14 cents per gallon off through Upside.
Drivers say the fine print on the offers dictates which card they use and where they fill up gas, making it difficult for them to save money.
“If I do the math, it’s ridiculous,” Mejia said. “They’re offering us nothing.”
Uber declined to comment, but pointed to its blog post about the gas relief efforts. Lyft also referenced the blog post and said “the gas savings were structured through rewards to maximize stackable opportunities.”
Guests at The Westin St. Francis hotel get into an Uber.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Gig workers have struggled with rising gas prices in the past.
In 2022, Lyft and Uber temporarily added a surcharge to their fares amid record-high gas prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This year, Uber is adding a fuel charge to its fares in Australia for roughly two months to offset the high cost of gas for drivers. Lyft said it hasn’t added a fuel charge in the U.S. or elsewhere.
Margarita Penalosa, who drives full time for Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles, started as a rideshare driver in 2017. Back then, gas was cheaper. She would easily hit her goal of making $300 in eight hours. Now she’s making just $250 after working as much as 14 hours.
Gas prices, she said, used to be less than $3 per gallon. Now some gas stations are charging more than $8 per gallon.
“Take out the gas. Take out the mileage from my car and maintenance. How much [do] I really make? Probably I get $11 for an hour,” she said.
Jonathan Tipton Meyers wants to spend fewer hours as a rideshare driver.
He already juggles multiple gigs even while driving for Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles. He’s a mobile notary and loan signing agent, a writer and performer.
Driving is “a very challenging, full-time job,” he said. “It’s very taxing and, of course, wages were just continually decreasing.”
John Mejia, a longtime Lyft and Uber driver, poses for a portrait before attending a meeting about unionizing gig drivers.
(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)
Even if oil continues to flow through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran reopened Friday, it could take a while for gas prices to come down to earth, said Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.
“There’s an old adage that prices rise like a rocket and fall like a feather,” he said. “I think that’ll apply.”
In the meantime, it will be survival of the fittest drivers. If enough of them decide to leave the apps, the ride-hailing companies could be forced to raise fares further to attract some back.
“Those who approach rideshare driving strategically, tracking expenses, choosing trips carefully, and optimizing efficiency are far more likely to weather periods of high gas prices,” wrote Avedian in the Rideshare Guy blog. “For everyone else, a spike at the pump can quickly turn rideshare driving from a side hustle into a money-losing venture.”
The proprietor of Los Angeles’ legendary Clifton’s has given up on reopening the shuttered venue.
It’s just too difficult to do business in downtown’s historic core, he says.
Andrew Meieran bought Clifton’s on Broadway in 2010 and poured more than $14 million into repairs, renovations and upgrades, adding additional bar and restaurant spaces in the four-story building. In 2018, he found that demand for cafeteria food was too low to be profitable, and he pivoted to a nightclub and lounge concept called Clifton’s Republic, featuring multiple dining and drinking venues. Meieran has tried elaborate themed environments, such as a tiki bar and forest playgrounds, and renting out the location for big events to spark more interest.
It was never easy, but during and since the pandemic, the neighborhood has grown increasingly unsafe as downtown has emptied of office workers and visitors.
Storefronts are gated up due to vandalism in the historic district in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
The alley behind Clifton’s Cafeteria in the downtown historic district Tuesday.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Vandalism has been rampant, with graffiti appearing on the historic structure almost daily. Vandals would use acid or diamond glass cutters to deface the windows, often cracking the glass. It would cost Meieran more than $30,000 each time to replace the windows. Insurance companies either stopped offering policies that covered vandalism or raised premiums by as much as 600%, he said.
There has been continuous crime in the area, he said, including multiple assaults on people in front of his building. He last shut the venue last year, hoping things would improve and he could come back with a business that could work. Now he has given up. Someone else may take over the space or even the name of the historic spot, but he is done trying.
“We’ve lost our way,” Meieran said. “I want to get up on the tops of the skyscrapers and yell that people need to pay attention to this.”
The disenchantment of a business leader who used to be one of downtown L.A.’s biggest backers shines a spotlight on the stubborn safety concerns, rising costs and thinner foot traffic that have made it increasingly difficult for even iconic businesses to survive.
The once-popular institution dates back to 1935, when it was a Depression-era cafeteria and kitschy oasis that sold as many as 15,000 meals a day when Broadway was the city’s entertainment hub.
It served traditional cafeteria food such as pot roast, mashed potatoes and Jell-O in a woodsy grotto among fake redwood trees and a stone-wrapped waterfall reminiscent of Brookdale Lodge in Northern California.
It’s not the only once-prominent destination that has failed to find a way to flourish in today’s market. Cole’s, one of L.A.’s most famous restaurants and often credited with inventing the French dip sandwich, closed last month after a 118-year run.
“The bigger problem for us and the rest of the industry is the high cost of doing business,” said Cedd Moses, who used to operate Cole’s and has backed many other bars and restaurants in historic buildings downtown for decades. “That’s what is killing independent restaurants in this city.”
Outside of Clifton’s Cafeteria.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s Republic owner Andrew Meieran stands next to a boat on the top floor of the historic restaurant in 2024.
(Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s opened and closed repeatedly during the pandemic and, more recently, after a burst pipe caused extensive damage. Meieran opened it for special events such as last Halloween, but it has otherwise been closed.
Police are woefully understaffed and hampered by public policy, said Blair Besten, president of downtown’s Historic Core Business Improvement District, a nonprofit that arranges graffiti removal, trash pickup and safety patrols in the area.
Businesses and residents in the area would like to see a bigger police presence, but there have been protests against that by people who are not from downtown, she said.
“People are starting to see the fruits of the defunding movement,” she said. “It has not led us to a better place as a city.”
The Los Angeles Police Department is making progress downtown, Captain Kelly Muniz said, with violent crime down more than 10% from last year.
“While we’re working very hard to solve crime, to prevent crime, there are still elements such as trash, open-air drug use, homelessness and graffiti,” she said. “We’re swinging in the right direction.”
Retailers have been opting out of downtown L.A., said real estate broker Derrick Moore of CBRE, who helps arrange commercial property leases. Brands have headed to more vibrant nearby neighborhoods such as Echo Park and Silver Lake.
“A lot of operators are just electing to skip over downtown,” he said. “They’re leasing spaces elsewhere, where they feel they have a greater chance at higher sales.”
A man walks past a pile of trash left on the street in the historic district.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
While some businesses are struggling, many downtown residents say their perceptions of safety are improving and that the area is regaining some vibrancy.
“A lot of people live here. I think people forget that,” Besten said. “We’re all surviving. It’s just hard for all the businesses to survive.”
A green shoot for the Historic Core is Art Night on the first Thursday of every month, when 50 or 60 locations, including permanent art galleries and pop-up galleries in unused storefronts, display art to map-toting visitors who come for the occasion.
They often end up in Spring Street bars, which more typically thrive on weekend nights but are still a draw to downtown.
“I think nightlife will thrive downtown, since bars attract people that don’t mind a little grittier atmosphere,” said Moses. “Our sales are hitting new records at our bars downtown, fortunately, but our costs have risen dramatically.”
A closed sign for Clifton’s Cafeteria.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Clifton’s former backer, Meieran, says he doesn’t think things are going to bounce back enough to warrant more massive investment. He has sold the building, and the owner is looking for a new tenant to occupy Clifton’s space. He still controls the Clifton’s name.
While there is still a chance he could let someone else use the name Clifton’s, Meieran is done for now — too many bad memories.
“There was a guy who was terrorizing the front of Clifton’s because he decided he wanted to live in the vestibule in front, and he didn’t want us to operate there,” Meieran said. “He would threaten to kill anybody who came through.”
He doesn’t believe official statistics that show crime and homelessness are way down in the area, and he doesn’t want to restart a business when criminals can so easily erase his hard work.
“What business that’s already on thin margins can survive that?” he said.
Trader Joe’s customers might soon get a payout from the popular grocery chain.
The Monrovia-based company agreed to a $7.4-million settlement in a class action lawsuit that claimed customers were left vulnerable to identity theft.
Customers who purchased items with a credit or debit card from March to July in 2019 might be eligible for a payment as part of the settlement.
The plaintiff alleged that some receipts printed in 2019 included 10-digit credit or debit card numbers —double what’s allowed under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.
Trader Joe’s “vigorously denies any and all liability or wrongdoing whatsoever,” the grocery chain said in the settlement website. The grocery chain decided to settle to avoid a long and costly litigation process.
The payout will go toward paying impacted customers as well as attorney fees and other expenses.
About $2.6 million will go toward attorney fees, and the plaintiff will receive a $10,000 incentive payment, according to the settlement. The remaining funds will be distributed evenly among customers who submit valid claims.
It’s unclear how much money each customer would get, but the payout could be about $102, according to the settlement notice.
To receive the payout, customers must have received a receipt displaying the first six and last four digits of the card number.
Some customers identified as part of the settlement class have been notified and received a class ID number to file a claim.
Customers have from now until June 6 to file a claim online or by phone.
A customer not identified in the settlement can still submit a claim by entering the first six and last four digits of the card used, along with the date it was used at Trader Joe’s.
Brian Keim, the plaintiff who brought the case, used his debit card at stores in Florida in 2019. He said some stores printed transaction receipts that included the first six and last four digits of customers’ card numbers.
The receipts did not include other personal information, such as the middle digits of the users’ cards, the cards’ expiration dates, or the users’ addresses. No customer has reported identity theft as a result of the receipts since the lawsuit was filed, the grocer said.
However, identity theft doesn’t require submitting a claim for payment.
The settlement was agreed upon by both the grocer and the plaintiff, but still has to be approved by a court. A hearing is set in August.
-
Washington, D.C51 seconds agoStorm Team4 Forecast: A chilly, gusty Sunday before a cool start to the week
-
Cleveland, OH7 minutes agoWinners and Losers From Cleveland Cavaliers NBA Playoffs Game 1
-
Austin, TX13 minutes agoStorms dump small hail throughout Austin area Saturday
-
Alabama19 minutes agoYMCA of South Alabama holds Healthy Kids Day in Spanish Fort
-
Alaska25 minutes ago
Bear injures two US soldiers during military training in Alaska | The Jerusalem Post
-
Arizona31 minutes agoNFL mock draft: 4-round projections for Arizona Cardinals
-
Arkansas37 minutes agoNo. 6 Arkansas ends top-ranked OU’s 31-game home winning streak with 3-2 decision
-
California43 minutes ago
Billionaire Steyer’s spending binge dwarfs rival campaigns in California governor’s race
