Thread: Fox sues and wins right to lie in news broadcasts

As dismal an accounting as this is of Fox news, it is a proper deference to the First Amendment, IMHO.

Imagine the opposite - who decides what is fact or not? The sitting administration, some elected body, etc?

Matt

Originally Posted by MattInFla

As dismal an accounting as this is of Fox news, it is a proper deference to the First Amendment, IMHO.

Imagine the opposite - who decides what is fact or not? The sitting administration, some elected body, etc?

Matt

You're over-thinking the problem. Who decides that when someone uses the wrong social security number they're committing fraud or simply made a mistake?

The burden of proof would have to fall with the accuser. They would have to show that the news organization KNEW they were misreporting facts, and were INTENTIONALLY lying. In the particular case linked, it appears the plaintiff was actually able to show these things. And the court said "meh, too bad how sad, Fox News can lie about anything anytime as long as it isn't libel or slander". Furthermore, they can legally fire you if you refuse to report the information known to be a lie.

Even the military can't court-martial you if you refuse to follow orders that are illegal.

Did I miss something in the ruling?

From what I read it would appear that the media at large, not just FOX, has the right to free speech....even if the facts are distorted. The ruling supports the right of people like you to post misleading headlines. It protects people like Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz from being sued for slander.

Do you have a problem with free speech? Do you feel a need for the government to protect you from words? Are you incapable of determining fact from fiction or opinion? Should all citizens be required to retain an attorney to protect them from the possible effects of potential lies?

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

You're over-thinking the problem. Who decides that when someone uses the wrong social security number they're committing fraud or simply made a mistake?

Apples and Oranges. What Constitutionally protected right is at play in your SSN scenario?

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

The burden of proof would have to fall with the accuser. They would have to show that the news organization KNEW they were misreporting facts, and were INTENTIONALLY lying. In the particular case linked, it appears the plaintiff was actually able to show these things. And the court said "meh, too bad how sad, Fox News can lie about anything anytime as long as it isn't libel or slander".

Right - welcome to the First Amendment. And rightly so, IMHO.

Matt

I don't see anything surprising at all.
Fox is what it is...a right leaning organization that gives the news according to that inherent bias....that is surrounded by left-leaning organizations that gives the news according to their inherent bias.
To say Fox is any worse than other outlets is patently naive to say the least.

Originally Posted by MattInFla

Apples and Oranges. What Constitutionally protected right is at play in your SSN scenario?



Right - welcome to the First Amendment. And rightly so, IMHO.

Matt

The fact that they're using Public Airwaves to disseminate known false information should therefore be completely legal? Shouldn't the public at least have the right to pull Fox's access from using public airwaves to lie?

The public has a great deal of power to regulate Fox - stop watching, and their revenues plummet. They'll change to get viewership back.

While I don't agree with what Fox is doing here, it is, IMHO, a First Amendment issue.

Seriously, who would decide what information was a "lie"? Where does that slippery slope end?

Originally Posted by MattInFla

The public has a great deal of power to regulate Fox - stop watching, and their revenues plummet. They'll change to get viewership back.

While I don't agree with what Fox is doing here, it is, IMHO, a First Amendment issue.

Seriously, who would decide what information was a "lie"? Where does that slippery slope end?

Ask the Chavez regime...