The Biggest Loser of the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Wasn't Amber - it was Mainstream Media
One Month after verdict distrust in the MSM increased from 56% to 67% of Americans - can outlets like CNN regain the trust of the American people or have they lost it forever? [UPDATED POLL]
56% of AMERICANS DON’T TRUST MSM (6/2/22)
Immediately following the trial PR conducted a paid randomized poll of more than 1,000 Americans on Facebook asking about their trust and confidence in newspapers, television, and radio news reporting similar to a Gallup poll from 20211. 56% of respondents indicated they had either ‘not very much’ or ‘none at all’.
67% of AMERICANS DON’T TRUST MSM (7/2/22)
One month following the trial PR conducted another paid randomized poll of more than 1,000 Americans on Facebook asking about their trust and confidence in newspapers, television, and radio news reporting similar to a Gallup poll from 2021. 56% of respondents indicated they do not trust the mainstream media.
When Amber Heard’s allegations of domestic abuse came to light the country was in the grip of the #metoo movement and the mainstream media immediately embraced Amber’s story. Believe all women was the mantra and as a result Johnny Depp’s side of the story never had a chance. Personally, I assumed Depp was a wife beater and didn’t spend a minute questioning the reporting I was reading at the time.
For six weeks the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard defamation trial was streamed live over the internet. Dozens of YouTube channels from major media outlets like Sky News streamed every minute of footage attracting millions of viewers. Niche legal YouTube channels like Law & Crime, Emily D. Baker, and Rekieta Law would often have a million or more viewers tuned into their live coverage.2 At the peak of the trial Law & Crime reached almost 3.5 million viewers who watched 84 million hours of the trial.3
With more than 150 hours of raw footage to work with thousands of memes and clips were created and viewed billions of times by millions of people across the planet. It is estimated that almost every American has seen at least some of the trial via livestream, video clip, or meme.
Immediately following Johnny Depp’s victory the mainstream media made a huge miscalculation in their reporting. Continuing their prior #metoo narratives the mainstream media began reporting that a grave injustice had occurred and that the verdict was a huge setback for women and victims of domestic abuse. The media neglected to realize that the American people had actually watched the trial.
For years most Americans dutifully believed Amber Heard’s claims that her ex-husband physically and sexually abused her throughout their short marriage. Claims to the contrary were suppressed and censored by big tech and the mainstream media. When Johnny Depp hired Adam Waldman to share evidence that contradicted Amber’s claims, Twitter suspended his account without warning or comment4 and the lawyer was maligned as a misogynistic enabler. Depp’s career was over and the matter was settled as far as big-tech and the media were concerned. But their ability to shape the ‘narrative’ was about to be upended by a Virginia Circuit Court Judge named Penney. The 57-year-old judge decided to allow the American people to watch the trial live on YouTube - and millions watched.
Over the course of six weeks, viewers were forced to reconcile what the evidence and testimony were revealing compared to the ‘narrative’ that the mainstream media was selling. Whether they were watching the wall-to-wall coverage or consuming clips on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, or YouTube it was clear to almost everyone that Amber Heard was lying. Regardless of their political affiliation, race, gender, or sexual orientation Americans were forced to admit to themselves that the mainstream media had been lying to them for years.
Americans were fixated as they listened to Amber describe the brutal attacks she suffered at the hands of her violent ex-husband. They watched as Amber explained in explicit, excruciating detail how Johnny Depp would pound his fist, studded with sharp rings, into her face over and over again. But when the lawyers presented pictures of her injuries something didn’t add up. Where were the cuts? Where were the bruises? Survivors of domestic violence were perhaps the most outspoken on social media calling Amber’s ‘injuries’ nothing more than blemishes or pimples - certainly not the vicious attack she described under oath.
Despite these contradictions, the media continued to report the ‘narrative’ seemingly unaware that their readers were watching the trial and had just as much or more information than they did. NPR reported Amber’s claims that Johnny had pounded his fist into her face over and over like a meat tenderizer suggesting that the pictures presented to the jury showed her “swollen face”. NPR was under the impression that their listeners didn’t see the pictures they were describing. Their listeners were beginning to realize that they couldn’t trust the media to tell them the truth about this trial.
At the end of the day, the biggest impact of this defamation trial was to force every American to question the honesty of the mainstream media. Everyone who watched the trial while following the mainstream media’s coverage realizes that the press wasn’t ‘reporting’ but instead ‘narrating’. In the political realm, most of us are all too comfortable accepting ‘spin’ if it supports our party - in this case, both parties were predisposed to hate Johnny Depp and yet the evidence was clear and convincing that he was Amber Heard’s victim. The Depp vs. Heard trial was perhaps the first time in history that Americans were able to consume the facts at the same time as the media allowing them to realize just how unreliable and untrustworthy the press can be. Here are just a few of the media’s attempts to continue to gaslight their readers:
