Fox News knew they were lying about election

[Segnosaur]

I've been wondering if a Class Action suit could be filed against Fox News for misleading their viewers?

I suspect not. I mean, you could probably launch one (since you can sue over anything), but it would probably get thrown out of court pretty quick.

The problem is, in order to be successful you have to show damages (such as Dominion claiming business losses because of Fox's lies affected their reputation and thus their sales.) But suing just because "Fox news lied so I voted for Stubby McBonespurs" isn't really anything you can put a dollar value on.

 

[Segnosaur]

The plaintiffs may have won their case against Alex Jones but IMO their chances of actually seeing a penny of the award is nearly zero. Jones has moved his money to companies controlled by his parents and made himself appear financially (as well as morally) bankrupt.
...
IMO the same will apply to FOXNews. They will drag out the legal process as long as possible in the hope of a favourable ruling somewhere, anywhere and if that doesn't work they'll battle any damages to the last and if that doesn't work they'll move the liability to a subsidiary which can then be wound up before Dominion see a penny.

It's the way that the rich and powerful manage to "cheat" justice.

I agree that Jones may be able to avoid paying out over his lawsuit. (Fortunately the plaintiff's lawyers seem to be pretty aware of the types of games he is playing so they may be able to get at least something in the end, but its not going to be easy.)

I think its a bit harder for Fox news to avoid having to pay, for a couple of reasons:

- The plantiff's lawyers have deeper pockets. (Its not a case of "Millionaire vs. poor person", its "millionaire vs. Millionaire") This will allow them a lot more leeway in fighting the case

- As scummy as Fox and Murdoch are, their business model is a bit more straight forward. (Its a publicly traded company, which means their books are a bit more open. Jones on the other hand owns everything privately so he can move things around to shell companies a lot easier.)

 

[newyorkguy]

I found it interesting, as explained in The Guardian news article (from July 2022) I am linking, that Dominion is suing Fox Corp., in addition to suing Fox News.

In June [2022], Dominion Voting Systems, which provided voting machines to 28 states, was given the go-ahead to sue Fox Corp, the parent company of Fox News, in a case that could draw Rupert Murdoch and his son, Lachlan, into the spotlight. In the $1.6bn lawsuit, Dominion accuses Fox Corp, and the Murdochs specifically, of allowing Fox News to amplify false claims that the voting company had rigged the election for Joe Biden.

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a professor who teaches constitutional law at Stetson University [said], “What’s particularly bad for Fox is [that] Dominion asked them to stop and correct the record in real time, and Fox persisted in spreading misrepresentations about the voting machine company.” Indeed, in his ruling [allowing Dominion's suit against Fox Corp. to go forward], Judge Eric Davis noted that “other newspapers under Rupert Murdoch’s control, including the Wall Street Journal and New York Post, condemned President Trump’s claims and urged him to concede defeat”. Guardian link

As for OAN, also being sued by Dominion, they face a bleak future.

“I think OAN is going to be wiped out from the litigation costs. Forget about any judgment,” said Angelo Carusone, president and chief executive of Media Matters for America, which monitors rightwing media.

 

[Donal]

I've been wondering if a Class Action suit could be filed against Fox News for misleading their viewers?

2 problems:

1) you need to prove specific harm. No matter what Lil' Swanson and the rest of the Ministry of "Truth" are spouting, you are inherently responsible for what you do. Spend all your money on some gold financing scam because Sean Hannity talked about how great the service is? Too bad. Get your dumbass beat because you decided to barge in on transgender brunch at a local bar? Too bad. Your kid get shot because some lunatic with an AR-15 thought the kindergarten was teaching CRT and he needed to "save" the students? Thoughts and prayers.

2) Courts will almost always side with the defendant on the grounds of Free Speech. The Alex Jones decision was just as much about the way he openly disrespected the court as what he was actually being sued for. FOX lawyers seem to at least be complying with requests.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Aren't there some FCC rules about programming calling itself news but not actually being news? Television --even cable-- isn't a complete free-for-all. There are regulations against false advertising, for instance. If Fox News calls itself "news" and broadcasts material it can be proven to know at the time was false, isn't that a violation of something or other? Heck, don't TV channels have to have licenses to operate?

 

[jadebox]

Fox News isn't a broadcast channel so it is free from the standards that stations using public airwaves have to abide by.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Fox News isn't a broadcast channel so it is free from the standards that stations using public airwaves have to abide by.

But aren't there standards for cable channels as well? I'm not certain the division is so clear any more in the era of streaming.

 

[Donal]

The only standard is they can't show hardcore pornography and some FTC regulations about the products they advertise. And the latter isn't even enforced that strictly. There's no definition of a "news" channel as far as the FCC is concerned.

 

[Lurch]

We're certainly getting an education in how the liberal freedoms afforded by a democracy are also a Trojan horse. Malign actors have a certain leeway to take advantage of these broad freedoms to destroy the system from within.

Putin needs only to hold out for a year-and-a-half. The American pendulum will swing rightward enough to hoist either the orange ogre or a smarter emulator into the White House. Then the nation will swiftly become so embroiled in internecine squabbling--if not an outright Civil War--that the US will contract into an isolationist basket case. And that will precipitate a great decline which the autocrats of the world will rejoice and exploit to the full.

This frightful scenario is all too possible because of the parlous state of awareness in a too large part of the base masses, whose ignorance of anything much beyond the end of the nose is all-encompassing. And among even the non deplorables memory tends to be easily overwritten by the latest little concern. Some 'kitchen table' issue or a 'scandal' could be manufactured or conjured in October, and come November a selfish concern could have enough fools trading away their freedom. Like one of Beau's T-shirts states, "You traded your country for a red hat."

The next trade will be for Russian red, white and blue.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

Like all things to do with Trumpworld and the GOP these days, this is very likely to backfire badly on them too.

Already Fox are staring at an almost certain $1.5 billion dollar loss due to the J6 debacle and the Trumpy parade of loons, liars and losers. Also it is well known that Rupert is fed up to the back teeth with Loser Don.

So I would expect Fox to manipulate their reporting to subtly (or maybe not so subtly) dump Trump and all who go with him. They will also pick a different "winner" to promote, maybe DeSantis? EmptyG may be on far thinner ice than she knows.

Back when Ole Rupe still had his wits about him, he'd have been grooming a likely lad from the other side who would be receptive to his whims and putting them in place to keep the show going. Looks like he doesn't have that foresight these days.

 

[Stacyhs]

The plaintiffs may have won their case against Alex Jones but IMO their chances of actually seeing a penny of the award is nearly zero. Jones has moved his money to companies controlled by his parents and made himself appear financially (as well as morally) bankrupt. The plaintiffs will likely not see any of their legal fees being paid, much less any damages.
IMO the same will apply to FOXNews. They will drag out the legal process as long as possible in the hope of a favourable ruling somewhere, anywhere and if that doesn't work they'll battle any damages to the last and if that doesn't work they'll move the liability to a subsidiary which can then be wound up before Dominion see a penny.

It's the way that the rich and powerful manage to "cheat" justice.

Jones' transfer of his money to appear bankrupt could be fraudulent under CT's UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT

"Sec. 52-552e. Transfers fraudulent as to present creditors. (a) A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, if the creditor's claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred and if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation: (1) With actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud any creditor of the debtor; or (2) without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation, and the debtor (A) was engaged or was about to engage in a business or a transaction for which the remaining assets of the debtor were unreasonably small in relation to the business or transaction, or (B) intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he would incur, debts beyond his ability to pay as they became due.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_923a.htm#sec_52-552

 

[Norman Alexander]

The plaintiffs may have won their case against Alex Jones but IMO their chances of actually seeing a penny of the award is nearly zero. Jones has moved his money to companies controlled by his parents and made himself appear financially (as well as morally) bankrupt. The plaintiffs will likely not see any of their legal fees being paid, much less any damages.

He may try that, but the court has seen through his little schemes and have taken a VERY dim view of them. I suspect the transferred assets will be considered still owned by him, not his parents, and thus part of his liability. Trump's asset disbursement method is illegal.

The situation seems to be that any income Jones acquires in future will become subject to some form of "garnishing", leaving him little beyond court-defined pocket-money for day-to-day. He may earn more big bucks, but the vast majority will go to paying his debt. Should he sell off his properties or cars, etc., that's still income. And since the debt is billions, he will NEVER pay it off, so he will be operationally poor the rest of his miserable life. Huzzah, say I.

 

[The Don]

Jones' transfer of his money to appear bankrupt could be fraudulent under CT's UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT


https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_923a.htm#sec_52-552

For sure it's illegal but time and again the rich and powerful have shown that the law doesn't apply to them.

He may try that, but the court has seen through his little schemes and have taken a VERY dim view of them. I suspect the transferred assets will be considered still owned by him, not his parents, and thus part of his liability. Trump's asset disbursement method is illegal.

The situation seems to be that any income Jones acquires in future will become subject to some form of "garnishing", leaving him little beyond court-defined pocket-money for day-to-day. He may earn more big bucks, but the vast majority will go to paying his debt. Should he sell off his properties or cars, etc., that's still income. And since the debt is billions, he will NEVER pay it off, so he will be operationally poor the rest of his miserable life. Huzzah, say I.

President Trump has yet to suffer any significant consequences from his illegal activities years down the line, I suspect the same is true for Jones. Like President Trump, his benefactors will see him right.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Jones' transfer of his money to appear bankrupt could be fraudulent under CT's UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT


https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/c...htm#sec_52-552

For sure it's illegal but time and again the rich and powerful have shown that the law doesn't apply to them.

President Trump has yet to suffer any significant consequences from his illegal activities years down the line, I suspect the same is true for Jones. Like President Trump, his benefactors will see him right.

Alex Jones is not a former POTUS so he doesn't have any of the 'special considerations', as we'll call them, that Trump has had. It's very obvious what Jones was trying to pull and I think the Connecticutt courts will see right through it.

 

[Norman Alexander]

President Trump has yet to suffer any significant consequences from his illegal activities years down the line, I suspect the same is true for Jones. Like President Trump, his benefactors will see him right.

No they won't. And donations to Saving-Stupid are "income" for Jones, and that's what will be seized towards his billion-dollar debt.

Alex Jones is not a former POTUS so he doesn't have any of the 'special considerations', as we'll call them, that Trump has had. It's very obvious what Jones was trying to pull and I think the Connecticutt courts will see right through it.

Yep, this. How the penalty payment will be structured is yet to be seen.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Even after the Sandy Hook verdict I have heard Alex Jones viewers say that he is "mostly right".

This, like everything else in the right-wing media space, is not, and never has been, about facts and truths, but about the opposite: sharing lies.
Because then you have to defend those lies against the rest of the world, which creates a sense of unity in the viewers.

It's about Weaponizing Crazy Conspiracy Theories so the Rich can get tax Cuts is it any wonder that is the Favorite American News show in Russia?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Jon Stewart podcast had an excellent discussion of the issues here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSyJ-r5IMoI

Thanks to the Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News filing, we now know what we’ve always believed is true: Fox News will do or say anything to retain their power, even if it means lying – over and over and over again – to their viewers. The question is, will they ever be held accountable? We’re joined this week by RonNell Anderson Jones, Professor of Law at the University of Utah, for a lively discussion about defamation law and the possibility that Fox News might actually have to face the music.

 

[Stacyhs]

Anyone who would listen to or give any credence to Alex Jones is, to put it bluntly, too stupid to see him for what he is. They are a lost cause cuz ya cain't fix stupid.

 

[alfaniner]

Anyone who would listen to or give any credence to Alex Jones is, to put it bluntly, too stupid to see him for what he is. They are a lost cause cuz ya cain't fix stupid.

I've just seen a couple movies where the protagonist(s) struggle to broadcast an undoctored recording that proves the government was lying, and succeed, informing and changing the minds of everyone watching. I can't see that happening nowadays.

 

[Stacyhs]

I've just seen a couple movies where the protagonist(s) struggle to broadcast an undoctored recording that proves the government was lying, and succeed, informing and changing the minds of everyone watching. I can't see that happening nowadays.

Into fantasy films, are ya?