Internet slams Bill Ackman as he dumps 77-page demand to Business Insider to retract plagiarism claims

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: Billionaire investor Bill Ackman's name has become synonymous with public battles and aggressive demands. But his latest salvo against a media outlet has sparked an especially viral wave of backlash.

Ackman unleashed a blistering 77-page legal complaint on Friday, February 23, accusing Business Insider and its parent company Axel Springer of unethical reporting practices and defamation over their coverage of plagiarism allegations made against his wife, scientist Neri Oxman, as per New York Post.

Bill Ackman claims Business Insider targeted Neri Oxman in retaliation for his criticism of Harvard

In a lengthy post on social media platform X, Ackman claimed that Business Insider only targeted Oxman in retaliation for his vocal criticism of Harvard University and its former president Claudine Gay over the school's handling of rising antisemitism.

Business Insider had previously reported that text in Oxman's PhD dissertation lacked proper attribution, publishing the story shortly after Gay resigned in the wake of plagiarism allegations against her and outrage over antisemitic incidents at the school, which Ackman had been actively criticizing.

"The articles are full of untrue and reckless claims, but worst of all, they falsely accuse Dr. Oxman of intentionally plagiarizing—and admitting to that academic misconduct—in her doctoral dissertation and other published works," the legal demand letter states.

Ackman accused the outlet of "unethical and unprofessional practices" and acting with "actual malice" against Oxman to harm her reputation.

Business Insider and Axel Springer have stood by their reporting about Neri Oxman

Both Business Insider and its parent company Axel Springer have firmly stood by the accuracy of their reporting on the plagiarism allegations against Oxman and denied there were any ethical issues with the stories.

In the demand letter, Ackman includes numerous screenshots of his communications with Business Insider executives related to their coverage. He argues the outlet owes Oxman a retraction of the "journalistic misconduct" against her. If no retraction occurs, Ackman says Oxman reserves the right to pursue legal action for defamation.

Internet delivers scathing response to Bill Ackman's demand for retraction

As news of Ackman's demand for a retraction circulated, the internet wasted no time in delivering a scathing response. One X user quipped, "Why not just admit you dragged your wife into one of your billionaire victim rants and now you’re over projecting?"

Another likened the situation to a long-running soap opera, quipping, "Your feed is like a soap opera that’s gone on for a few too many seasons." A user took a more direct approach, stating, "It’s because you had zero shot at a successful lawsuit lol."

Meanwhile, a forthright individual provided a condensed version of Ackman's situation, commenting, "Shortened version: I was pressured not to sue, counseled that I'd lose both money & the case, & am attempting to back out with one ball intact. Got it, Bill. It happens. Thanks for the update."

The online critique continued, with one user expressing: "Oh, poor Bill Ackman! He's been the subject of 'thousands' of negative articles, but he's never sued anyone until now. How noble of him to turn the other cheek for so long, only to finally take a stand when his partner is 'defamed' by Business Insider. It couldn't possibly be because his ego was bruised or anything. And let's not forget the irony of Ackman accusing Business Insider of having an agenda against him, while he himself has a clear agenda against Harvard's former President Claudine Gay. Because clearly, it's only okay to criticize someone if you're Bill Ackman."

In a final, blunt comment, one user simply told Ackman, "Bill shut the fuck up. Nobody is reading this. You're embarrassing yourself."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.