The Los Angeles (AP)-Loyal tribes from Brazil’s Amazon filed a lawsuit in The New York Times, saying that the newspaper’s reports of the first effect of the genus on the Internet have led its members to be widely portrayed as technology and porn.
This week, the Los Angeles court filed a defamation lawsuit looking for hundreds of million dollars in the Los Angeles Court this week, with the Sovereign Community of about 2000 people in the tropical forest of Los Angeles.
It also identifies TMZ and Yahoo as the defendants, claiming that their stories had reinforced and sensationalized the Times reports and lubricated the tribe.
The lawsuit says Times 2024 Jack Nico, a journalist of Jack Nice about how the group managed the introduction of satellite service through Elon Musk Starlink, “depicting Marub people as a community unable to control the main Internet exposition, emphasizing their youth.”
“These statements were not only inflammatory, but also conveyed to the average reader that Marubo people descended on the moral and social downturn due to direct access to the Internet,” the altered version of Thursday’s claim. “Such images go beyond cultural comments; discipline or values to work in the modern world. ”
A spokesman for the Associated Press Times said: “Any correct reading of the piece shows a sensitive and nuanced exploration of new technologies in the benefits and complications in a remote local village with proud history and a preserved culture. We are going to defend themselves vigorously.”
The theme of Nico’s history was that after less than a year, the service community has now encountered the same struggles with the universal influence of the Internet and the increase in smartphones that many of the world have encountered for many years.
Nice listed a wide range of challenges: “Teenagers are glued to phones; group conversations full of gossip; addiction social networks; online strangers; violent video games; scams; misinformation; minors who watch porn.”
He later wrote that the tribe’s leader was “most worried about pornography. He said young men share clear videos in group conversations – a stunning culture that plagues in public.”
There is no other mention of pornography in the piece, but that aspect of the story has been strengthened and summarized by other sales, including the TMZ, which told the story and the attached video, “Elon Musk Hookup leaves a remote tribe dependent on pornography.”
The lawsuit says the image segment “falsely framed the Marub” tribe that descended into the moral collapse. “
TMZ and Yahoo comment on messages was not immediately answered.
False perceptions caused by the accumulation and repackaging of history prompted Times to declare further actions.
“Maruba people are not addicted to pornography,” Nice wrote in the second story. “There was no hint in the forest, and the New York Times did not offer it.”
This was not satisfied with the tribe, which in the court’s lawsuit says she “did not recognize the role of NYT himself in which she played a defamatory narrative. Instead of releasing a retreat or apology, further actions diminished the original emphasis on the article porn, changing the guilt to third -party aggregators.”
Nice wrote that he had spent a week with the Marub tribe. The court’s lawsuit says that he was invited for a week, he spent less than 48 hours in the village: “Barely enough time to observe, understand or respect the community.
The trial was first announced by the Court of COURTHOUSE NEWS.
The plaintiffs also include community leader Enoque Marub and Brazilian journalist and sociologist Flora Dutra, who both appeared in the story.
Both of them helped to establish an internet connection, which they said had many positive consequences, including facilitating medical and child education.
They mentioned a TMZ video showing that they create antennas for connection because they create a “undeniable impression” that both “named harmful, sexually clear material to the community and facilitated alleged moral and social degradation.”
From each defendants, the claim is at least $ 180 million, including both gross and criminal damage.
“The downturn of the publication was not limited to the public’s perception,” he said, “he destroyed lives, institutions and culturally significant projects.”