Analysis: The case of Fox News and the cost of spreading lies

Share This Post

- Advertisement -

WILMINGTON, Delaware – In reaching an agreement with Dominion Voting Systems, Fox News avoided a humiliating and protracted trial in which its founder, Rupert Murdoch, its top managers and its biggest stars would have had to submit to a hostile cross-examination on an embarrassing question: why did they allow a vitriolic and defamatory conspiracy theory on the of 2020 will be disclosed in the chain when many of them they knew it was fake?

- Advertisement -

But the deal $787.5 million — one of the largest defamation settlements in history — and Fox’s court filing acknowledging that the court had ruled that “certain statements about Dominion” made in its programming “were false” amount, at the very least, to a rare and infamous acknowledgment Of information irregularities from a nerve center of the conservative media and cable channel America’s most popular.

“Money is liability,” said Stephen Shackelford, Dominion’s attorney, as he left court, “and we got it from Fox today.”

- Advertisement -

The terms of the settlement, which was announced abruptly just before the lawyers were due to make their initial statements, did not require Fox he will apologize for any irregularities in their scheduling, a point Dominion had lobbied about.

Fox News attorney Daniel Webb.  Photo: AP

Fox News attorney Daniel Webb. Photo: AP

Shortly after the deal was reached, Fox said he was “confident that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, rather than in the acrimony of a contentious lawsuit, will enable the country to put these issues behind it.”

The agreement contains the clause of “no context” of several preliminary conclusions by the judge who handled the case, Eric M. Davis, who offered an exceptionally harsh image on Fox programming.

In one such closing, the judge sided with Dominion in his claim that Fox could not claim airing the conspiracy theory — generally in relation to the false claim that its machines “changed” Trump’s votes compared to those of Biden – was covered by the legal guarantee of “news gathering” that can protect news organizations when data is disputed.

The judge wrote, “the evidence does not support that FNN reported in good faith and selflessly.”

“Clearer than water”

In another conclusion, the judge wrote that “evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that I am LIGHTER CREAM than any Dominion-related statement about the 2020 election.” They are real“.

With these conclusions, the judge severely limited Fox’s ability to argue that it was acting as a news channel that followed the claims of a news generatorin this case, The president of the United Stateswho was the main disseminator of the false tale of Dominion.

In the hectic days leading up to the first day of the trial, Fox had indicated that if he lost the case, he would prepare an appeal that would, at least in part, appeal those court rulings. Now they are indisputable.

By the end of the day on Tuesday, it was clear that Fox’s lawyers were making an urgent calculation take the financial hit rather than risk losing the case.

Dominion Voting Systems executives walk out of Delaware courthouse.  Photo: Reuters

Dominion Voting Systems executives walk out of Delaware courthouse. Photo: Reuters

As many legal experts had argued before the trial, Dominion had managed to reunite an unusual amount of internal Fox documentation which proved that many within the company knew of Dominion’s election conspiracy theory it was pure fantasy. This extended to the highest levels of the channel, right down to Murdoch himself.

“Royal Malice”

That evidence appeared to bring Dominion closer to the legal threshold for defamation cases known as “real willful misconduct,” which is when libelous statements “are made with the knowledge of their falsehood or with thoughtless indifference as to whether or not they are true.” (That threshold, however, is not always easy to reach, and there are no guarantees in front of a jury.)

“Dominion Voting had obtained much conclusive evidence that Fox had acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truththat he could have shown in front of a jury, then the only outstanding issue would have been damages,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond.

“The case process might as well have it undermined Fox’s reputation when the evidence is presented in public hearing.

It was less surprising that Fox struck a deal than that it did so late on Tuesday. A trial allegedly led to Fox News staffers and Murdoch arguing with lawyers about their knowledge of the falsehood and why they hadn’t taken any action to stop it.

The answers would have further exposed the modus operandi within an organization that has been around for a long time protecting your internal operations.

conspiracy content

The one question only time can answer is whether the deal was enough for Fox News change the way you handle conspiracy content so inflammatory and defamatory.

The amount It is huge: $787.5 million. Fox News certainly doesn’t want a similar settlement to be struck anytime soon, as other legal cases loom, in particular a $2.7 billion lawsuit from another election technology company, Smartmatic.

Fox, however, managed to evade Dominion’s goal of an on-air acknowledgment or apology, meaning it didn’t have to force its audience either, who initially didn’t hear much about the case on Fox’s shows. Fox.

“It’s hard to say to what extent a ruling against Fox would have been damaging to the company, beyond the financial cost of the verdict, because your audience is very loyal and believed in the polarizing perspective presented by his pundits,” trial attorney Michelle Simpson Tuegel said in a statement.

“But the reputational damage of having executives, including President Rupert Murdoch, and drivers testify on the witness stand appears to have pushed the parties toward a resolution.”

ap​

Source: Clarin

- Advertisement -

Related Posts