Many major stories that made it big in the national news start off as a local or small paper doing the initial reporting. (For example the Flint, Mi lead water) These papers have such tiny budgets that they can easily be silenced.
That's theoretically true - after all, it's the same way patent trolling works. But he hasn't actually proven that yet, since he did win a juried verdict (with punitive damages, on top of that).
That's about as clear-cut a decision as our legal system can provide (before getting to the appellate level).
The only difference this time is they picked on a bully with bigger pockets.
It's all handwaving madly so the flaws in their reasoning aren't spotted. That remains my position until a good argument gets presented that isn't all over the place with logic leaps.
Plenty of environmentalists would be happy if an oil company got sued into bankruptcy over a spill.
It's the way of the courts, really.