$787.5 Million You Cucks

[BartHanson]

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-ne...-23/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04...ial-settlement


I'm happy that Fox has to pay through the nose on this but it's too bad this one didn't get trial. Here's hoping that Smartmatic can get their suit further vs Fox and that Dominion can put OAN permanently out of business. But then again it won't matter to most of droolers as you will believe whatever drivel is fed your way by the likes of Tucker Carlson, Newsmax, Steve Bannon, etc.

Here is an interesting piece on how some small communities are using up enormous parts of their local budgets to switch over from existing Dominion voting systems because of "fraud". SMH

[Sloppy Joe]

Gotta keep the viewers angry and scared, even if it means close to a bil in settlements to keep the facade going.

Republican party doesn't exist if they can't foment rage and fear amongst the poor and old.

[DJ_Chaps]

Democratic party doesn't exist if they can't foment rage and fear amongst the blue haired gender benders and self hating SJWs.

Also accurate

[dwai]

[mickeycrimm]

Bad day for the 1st Amendment.

Just like Hanson, I wish it would have went to trial too.

Alan Dershowitz believes he would have won this case for Fox. He thinks it is a no brainer. He's dumbfounded that Fox settled. And he knows a hell of a lot more about the law than you do, cuck, er, bart.

[Cerveza Fria]

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

[Sanlmar]

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

It’s not different.

Fox should be free to say whatever they wish. They aren’t journalists. Even if they were it’s first amendment.

Fox settled for PR. Tucker Carlson and company testifying woulda been a bad look. Worth every penny to prevent that imagery

Don’t confuse the law with justice or some such nonsense. It’s just law.

[Sloppy Joe]

Bad day for the 1st Amendment.

Just like Hanson, I wish it would have went to trial too.

Alan Dershowitz believes he would have won this case for Fox. He thinks it is a no brainer. He's dumbfounded that Fox settled. And he knows a hell of a lot more about the law than you do, cuck, er, bart.

And this is why you settle, folks.

Idiots like mickeycrimm are a dime a dozen and they can't lose the audience for Mypillows and Rascals.

[Sanlmar]

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

It’s not different.

Fox should be free to say whatever they wish. They aren’t journalists. Even if they were it’s first amendment.

Fox settled for PR. Tucker Carlson and company testifying woulda been a bad look. Worth every penny to prevent that imagery

Don’t confuse the law with justice or some such nonsense. It’s just law.

I don’t watch Fox and I didn’t follow the Dominion nonsense.

I’m gonna admit I really don’t know the story but the above was my reflex. Prolly no different than most.

Not believing in our democratic process or outcomes was the far more important story….

[limitles]

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

It’s not different.

Fox should be free to say whatever they wish. They aren’t journalists. Even if they were it’s first amendment.

Fox settled for PR. Tucker Carlson and company testifying woulda been a bad look. Worth every penny to prevent that imagery

Don’t confuse the law with justice or some such nonsense. It’s just law.

FOX NEWS. That is how they present themselves.
They have muddied the line between news and opinion and
have gotten away with it.

That is a big problem.
CNN and others are as guilty

[dwai]

Bad day for the 1st Amendment.

Just like Hanson, I wish it would have went to trial too.

Alan Dershowitz believes he would have won this case for Fox. He thinks it is a no brainer. He's dumbfounded that Fox settled. And he knows a hell of a lot more about the law than you do, cuck, er, bart.

And this is why you settle, folks.

Idiots like mickeycrimm are a dime a dozen and they can't lose the audience for Mypillows and Rascals.

During the court proceeding, Maddow’s attorney argued that her show was one of “quintessential statements of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.”

The judge first said:

“Maddow’s show is different than a typical news segment where anchors inform viewers about the daily news,” the opinion said. “The point of Maddow’s show is for her to provide the news but also to offer her opinions as to that news. Therefore, the Court finds that a reasonable viewer would not conclude that the contested statement implies an assertion of objective fact.”

we don't see the news, only what the cia wants the left or right wing extremists to hear and see

[limitles]

• June 3, 2003

WASHINGTON, June 2 — The Federal Communications Commission today narrowly approved the most important changes to the nation's media ownership rules in a generation.

By a partisan 3-to-2 vote, the Republican-controlled commission relaxed many of the most significant restrictions on the ability of broadcast and newspaper conglomerates to both expand into new markets and to extend their reach in the cities where they already have a presence.


FCC FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission(FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints.^[1] In 1987, the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine,^[2] prompting some to urge its reintroduction through either Commission policy or congressional legislation.^[3]

The fairness doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The demise of this FCC rule has been cited as a contributing factor in the rising level of party polarization in the United States.^[5][6]

So broadcast regulations were lessened as were restrictions on ownership. Enjoy

The market just magically handles everything.

Once more, a doctrine established in the forties to ensure fairness in publications was repealed. You must ask yourself why? What was wrong with the original idea?

De legitimizing or controlling the press in any manner is a major red flag. It will not last
but it’s disturbing

[ftpjesus]

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-ne...-23/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04...ial-settlement


I'm happy that Fox has to pay through the nose on this but it's too bad this one didn't get trial. Here's hoping that Smartmatic can get their suit further vs Fox and that Dominion can put OAN permanently out of business. But then again it won't matter to most of droolers as you will believe whatever drivel is fed your way by the likes of Tucker Carlson, Newsmax, Steve Bannon, etc.

Here is an interesting piece on how some small communities are using up enormous parts of their local budgets to switch over from existing Dominion voting systems because of "fraud". SMH

No offense Bart intended when I say this. Wtf makes you think MSNBC and CNN and some others are any better man. Both sides of the political spectrum have destroyed any journalistic integrity. MSNBC is no more the a mouthpiece for the Dems and CNN not really any better just like Fox and OAN push the GOP talking points. That doesn’t make either of them reliable news and more akin to sounding board/ echo chambers for their viewers and corporate overlords. I mean ironically it took deep diving to discover that both CNN MSNBC FOX all reported the same lies about chlorine gas attacks in Syria and some actual journalists on the group actual interviewed medical personnel there and said it was all a staged clown car show by the so called white hats who have a dubious background in Syria.

[mickeycrimm]

Under Cuck Hanson's thin veneer of tolerance and virtue is a fascist thug. For 4 long years we heard nothing out of the liberal press but Russia! Russia! Russia! The media knew it was all a hoax/lies but they kept on with Russia! Russia! Russia! They knowingly pushed a false narrative for FOUR LOOOOOOOOONNNGGGG FUCKINNNNNNNG YEARRRRRRRRS!

Then the radical left's useful idiots like Cuck Hanson climb out from under their rocks and scream "Fox News is a liar! Fox News is a liar! Fox News is a liar! Sue! Sue! Sue!" Nothing but lowlife slugs.

[Jayjami]

Bad day for the 1st Amendment.

Just like Hanson, I wish it would have went to trial too.

Alan Dershowitz believes he would have won this case for Fox. He thinks it is a no brainer. He's dumbfounded that Fox settled. And he knows a hell of a lot more about the law than you do, cuck, er, bart.

You know who knows a lot about the law? The Fox News lawyers. Fox settled because they knew were going to get their asses kicked. It’s that simple.

[Mission146]

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

I don't think it's a First Amendment question (in response to Mickey).

The difference is that the company can demonstrate damages based upon a lie perpetrated by a news outlet.

If the First Amendment were absolute, then one effect of that is committing slander would be literally impossible. You could say whatever you want about whoever you want, regardless of your station.

It's reputation damage to a business that constitutes slander and probably tortious interference with economic advantage, as well.

Also, all the hosts really need do is throw words out such as, "I think," or, "In my opinion," and just preface the hell out of the statements that they KNOW are lies anyway. If they had just done that, then they would probably be legally in the clear as Dominion wouldn't have had a cause of action or any legal mechanism to get to the texts (and other stuff) proving that Fox knew they were lying.

Fox is also considered a legitimate news source by a wide variety of retarded people, but because of that, they are in a position to cause great financial harm to any number of companies. With that, they either need to know they are telling the truth or disclaim statements of opinion (or known falsehoods) every fucking time. That's Journalism 101, retards.

[JimmyG_415]

That, but also the fact that the people at Fox "news" from the top down, KNEW they were lying.

A woman who says the wind talks to her ....................turns out to be a key source of allegations that Fox News presented, night after night, to millions of viewers late that fall.

If you get your "news" and this an example of one of their sources?, you are just dumb, or you are a snowflake who wants to block the truth; That Trump lost in a landslide.

EDIT For LINK: The 'wackadoodle' foundation of Fox News' election-fraud claims
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/20/11582...on-fraud-claim

How is what Fox did any different than what CNN, MSDNC, CBS, ABC and NBC do on a regular basis?

I don't think it's a First Amendment question (in response to Mickey).

The difference is that the company can demonstrate damages based upon a lie perpetrated by a news outlet.

If the First Amendment were absolute, then one effect of that is committing slander would be literally impossible. You could say whatever you want about whoever you want, regardless of your station.

It's reputation damage to a business that constitutes slander and probably tortious interference with economic advantage, as well.

Also, all the hosts really need do is throw words out such as, "I think," or, "In my opinion," and just preface the hell out of the statements that they KNOW are lies anyway. If they had just done that, then they would probably be legally in the clear as Dominion wouldn't have had a cause of action or any legal mechanism to get to the texts (and other stuff) proving that Fox knew they were lying.

Fox is also considered a legitimate news source by a wide variety of retarded people, but because of that, they are in a position to cause great financial harm to any number of companies. With that, they either need to know they are telling the truth or disclaim statements of opinion (or known falsehoods) every fucking time. That's Journalism 101, retards.

[devidee]

[Entropy]

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-ne...-23/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04...ial-settlement


I'm happy that Fox has to pay through the nose on this but it's too bad this one didn't get trial. Here's hoping that Smartmatic can get their suit further vs Fox and that Dominion can put OAN permanently out of business. But then again it won't matter to most of droolers as you will believe whatever drivel is fed your way by the likes of Tucker Carlson, Newsmax, Steve Bannon, etc.

Here is an interesting piece on how some small communities are using up enormous parts of their local budgets to switch over from existing Dominion voting systems because of "fraud". SMH

I almost called you Gus Hanson, lol. Anyhow let me tell you something about Dominion, they bought Diebold. Fyi Diebold is the nut low, totally riggable.
The current company in charge of Dominionis a private equity firm with ties to The Carlyle Group.

THE CARLYLE GROUP! Bart what's wrong with a verifiable paper trail? Saving the trees or what.

[Entropy]

This isn't a partisan issue, our govt and media have gone totally rogue.

For instance I bet you guys didn't know that recently declassified Sept 11th documents indicate a couple hijackers were CIA recruits, no biggie.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9...-cia-recruits/