There's another big defamation case against Fox News — and it could prove the knockout punch.

[onthedarkside]

 

As Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Corporation battles to contain the Dominion lawsuit scandal that has engulfed its top executives and stars, another crisis is building in the wings that has the potential to cause further turbulence for the media empire.

 

Smartmatic’s lawsuit against Fox News has attracted only a fraction of the attention garnered by the legal action of Dominion Voting Systems, yet both firms are suing Fox for defamation related to its coverage of Donald Trump’s stolen-election lie, and both pose a serious threat to Fox’s finances and reputation.

 

In fact, on paper Smartmatic’s suit appears to be the more dangerous.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/13/smartmatic-defamation-lawsuit-against-fox-news

 

[Tug]

Good!bankrupt those scumbags humiliate bankrupt the lot of them and close them down!

[kwonitoy]

I wonder if he will just shut it down like the paper he owned in the UK

He is a businessman and if the numbers don't add up he may walk

He has no loyalty to anyone but himself

[quake]

Come back Bill O'Reilly

All is forgiven. 

[Chomper Higgot]

All they had to do is not lie.

[herfiehandbag]

37 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

All they had to do is not lie.

Don't be silly. 

 

It's Fox News!

[bamnutsak]

2 hours ago, Tug said:

Good!bankrupt those scumbags humiliate bankrupt the lot of them and close them down!

 

Actually bankruptcy often yields benefits to a losing defendent.

 

Fox will settle before going to trial, surprised they haven't yet.

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, Tug said:

Good!bankrupt those scumbags humiliate bankrupt the lot of them and close them down!

Even a judgement of 1.6 billion won't result in bankruptcy. Or even put Fox in the red for the year.

[Eric Loh]

3 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

 

Actually bankruptcy often yields benefits to a losing defendent.

 

Fox will settle before going to trial, surprised they haven't yet.

Fox may want to settle but I don't think Smartmatic and Dominion share the same thought. Both plantiff have little incentive to settle. Their business models are built on public's trust and therefore need clear judgement that find Fox was lying on purpose. It will be worth more than whatever Fox would settle. 

[bamnutsak]

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

Both plantiff have little incentive to settle.

You never know with juries.

 

Where's Billy McBride when you need him?

 

I would think that the terms of any settlement would be the main challenge - admission of guilt/NDA/destruction of discovery records, etc. - than the dollar amount?

[placeholder]

49 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Even a judgement of 1.6 billion won't result in bankruptcy. Or even put Fox in the red for the year.

Actually I was partly wrong. Such a judgement would put probably put Fox in the red, but not seriously. There is a bigger lawsuit that's asking for 2.7 billion. Even that wouldn't put Fox under but it would definitely hurt a lot.

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Actually I was partly wrong. Such a judgement would put probably put Fox in the red, but not seriously. There is a bigger lawsuit that's asking for 2.7 billion. Even that wouldn't put Fox under but it would definitely hurt a lot.

The plaintiffs in both cases can ask the court to apply punitive damages which in in NY limitless.

[Eric Loh]

18 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

You never know with juries.

 

Where's Billy McBride when you need him?

 

I would think that the terms of any settlement would be the main challenge - admission of guilt/NDA/destruction of discovery records, etc. - than the dollar amount?

According to legal experts, there are incredibly damning Fox documents that even stun them. Emails and texts greatly increased the chances that Dominion and probably even Smartmatic will win their defamation suits. Recent Fox's bids to dismiss the defamation lawsuits were dismissed which doesnt 'bode well for Fox.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Eric Loh
wrong word

[placeholder]

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The plaintiffs in both cases can ask the court to apply punitive damages which in in NY limitless.

Here's hoping.

[bamnutsak]

The hurdles for proving defamation, especially in when it involves "the press", versus the First Amendment are nearly insurmountable.

 

How many successful defamation cases in the U.S. involving the press have been in favor of the plaintiff?

 

I'm just saying that it's hardly a slam-dunk, forgetting about years and years of appeals, where at each stage there will be pressure from the judge to settle.

 

Of course the conservative majority on SCOTUS would like reverse New York Times v. Sullivan, which is interesting, in an ironic sort of way.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, bamnutsak said:

The hurdles for proving defamation, especially in when it involves "the press", versus the First Amendment are nearly insurmountable.

 

How many successful defamation cases in the U.S. involving the press have been in favor of the plaintiff?

 

I'm just saying that it's hardly a slam-dunk, forgetting about years and years of appeals, where at each stage there will be pressure from the judge to settle.

 

Of course the conservative majority on SCOTUS would like reverse New York Times v. Sullivan, which is interesting, in an ironic sort of way.

As numerous legal experts have pointed out, Dominion has an exceptionally strong case.

 

Legal experts say Fox News on shaky legal ground in Dominion lawsuit 

Dominion argues the vignettes contained in its court filings demonstrate how top hosts and executives at Fox knew the claims being pushed by Trump’s associates about Dominion were false but aired them anyway.  

“One just doesn’t see cases like this in defamation,” said Catherine Ross, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University who specializes in First Amendment issues.  

“Fox does not appear to have any plausible defense, particularly in light of what Dominion uncovered in discovery of real-time knowledge of falsity,” she said.  

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3881278-legal-experts-say-fox-news-on-shaky-legal-ground-in-dominion-lawsuit/

[BusyB]

On 3/14/2023 at 7:12 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

All they had to do is not lie.

Some people just can't help themselves ????

 

What many don't realize is that Fox 'News' is actually licensed as an entertainment channel, not a news channel. So it doesn't have to be as 'Fair and Balanced' as it claims to be. That's just another ten for a penny lie - par for the course with that lot.

 

Lies have been Fox 'News' main source of revenue - till Dominion and Smartmatic came along.

 

[stevenl]

On 3/14/2023 at 2:20 PM, BusyB said:

Some people just can't help themselves ????

 

What many don't realize is that Fox 'News' is actually licensed as an entertainment channel, not a news channel. So it doesn't have to be as 'Fair and Balanced' as it claims to be.  <snip>

 

I know about the Tucker case, but is this true?

[placeholder]

On 3/14/2023 at 2:20 PM, BusyB said:

Some people just can't help themselves ????

 

What many don't realize is that Fox 'News' is actually licensed as an entertainment channel, not a news channel. So it doesn't have to be as 'Fair and Balanced' as it claims to be. That's just another ten for a penny lie - par for the course with that lot.

 

Lies have been Fox 'News' main source of revenue - till Dominion and Smartmatic came along.

 

In the USA there's no such thing as being licensed as an entertainment channel or a news channel or any kind of channel. Maybe it's the case elsewhere.

[OneMoreFarang]

I wonder how many people who watch Fox know that they are lying. And they still watch it.

For anybody with a brain it shouldn't be too difficult to see at least the big lies from Fox "news".

Many people love their distorted echo chambers - and not only Fox viewers. 

[RichardColeman]

If every newstation or station got sued and removed for slander etc, then the whole tv wavelengths would just be static

[Kwaibill]

9 hours ago, placeholder said:

Even a judgement of 1.6 billion won't result in bankruptcy. Or even put Fox in the red for the year.

Punitive damages after the 1.6 Billion have no cap in the venue.

[placeholder]

15 minutes ago, Kwaibill said:

Punitive damages after the 1.6 Billion have no cap in the venue.

Chomper Higgot beat you to it. But thanks, anyway.

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

If every newstation or station got sued and removed for slander etc, then the whole tv wavelengths would just be static

Do you believe that Fox is somehow going to get "removed" If not, why raise the issue.

On the other hand, "if every newsstation or station got sued"...to have a good chance of succeeding, the evidence in those cases would have to be as strong against them as it is against Fox News.

[Skeptic7]

Faux News. We BS and deride❗

 

Lost whatever credibility it had 15 years ago. Hopefully the hammer comes down hard on Murdoch and his looney band of fraudsters. 

[bamnutsak]

11 hours ago, placeholder said:

On the other hand, "if every newsstation or station got sued"...to have a good chance of succeeding, the evidence in those cases would have to be as strong against them as it is against Fox News.

Fox Boradcasting does own and operate 18 local TV stations, and has another 227 affiliates. So their coporate lies and poison get an extra boost.

[Dave0206]

They can not settle one out of court that would give 2nd lawsuit much more leverage even if settlement was " sealed " everyone knows its an admission of guilt 

[BusyB]

On 3/14/2023 at 2:57 PM, stevenl said:

I know about the Tucker case, but is this true?

As far as I know. I retained that mentally from a reputable source some time way back so cannot quote/link. But TBOMK that's the case.

[BusyB]

On 3/14/2023 at 3:00 PM, placeholder said:

In the USA there's no such thing as being licensed as an entertainment channel or a news channel or any kind of channel. Maybe it's the case elsewhere.

I'm not gonna argue, but my source was reputable. It was some time back and maybe the wording/classification was different. But Fox 'News' and CNN are AFAIK regulated differently in that sense. 

Quite prepared to accept I may have misunderstood something. But that would still be no recommendation to choose Fox over others ????

 

[Salerno]

On 3/14/2023 at 6:57 PM, stevenl said:

I know about the Tucker case, but is this true?

"Fox News (as well as CNN and MSNBC) is not an accredited news station because no regulatory body exists in the United States that has the authority to make such a classification. "

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-entertainment-switch/