The owners of a Russian bank have filed a lawsuit against the online publication BuzzFeed for publishing an uncorroborated dossier that alleged they were part of a Russian scheme to influence the 2016 US presidential election.
Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven and German Khan of Alfa Bank are seeking unspecified damages from BuzzFeed, editor-in-chief Ben Smith, reporter Ken Bensinger, and editors Miriam Elder and Mark Schoofs.
The dossier published on January 10 included explosive claims that Russian officials had compiled compromising information about Donald Trump. He called the report "fake news".
BuzzFeed admitted the allegations were unverified and "potentially unverifiable", but defended publishing the report because it said Americans "can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect".
Other news outlets withheld most details about the unverified claims because they could not confirm them.
The dossier compiled by a former British intelligence agent claimed that Mr Fridman, Mr Aven and Mr Khan had a history of exchanging illicit favours with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The lawsuit filed in state court in Manhattan said BuzzFeed defamed the plaintiffs by alleging they were "required to do President Putin's bidding" and by linking them to the alleged Russian campaign to interfere in the US election.
BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenthal said: "Given that the allegations contained in the dossier were presented to successive presidents and remain under active investigation by intelligence agencies and Congress, there is little doubt that their publication was and continues to be in the public interest.
"That makes it all the more important that this shameless attempt to bully and intimidate BuzzFeed News not have a chilling effect on other journalists who continue to report this important story."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here