I'm just waiting to see how the Dominion lawsuits with NewsMax and OAN also end up going. Those outlets aren't nearly as big as Fox and I don't think they can really afford huge pay outs.
It also taught the Fox employees to use burner phones for text messages in the future. Could you and Ken address the Smartmatic claims in an upcoming epiosde? Specifically how their damage claims compare to Dominion. As I understand it, Fox didn't say as much about Smartmatic, but Smartmatic is a bigger business with bigger theoretical damages. Thanks
I forget if this was in the episode or not, but I asked Ken about this and his view was that Smartmatic likely could not demonstrate damages as large as Dominion could, because Smartmatic's business footprint in the US is quite small (just LA County in the 2020 election), and that that would tend to flow through to a smaller settlement or judgment.
Wondering out loud here: What would happen if the Smartmatic case goes to trial and Fox is found non-liable? It probably wouldn't re-hire Carlson, but would it revert back to its Carlson-adjacent lies?
I thought that their US footprint was small, but they are a bigger company overall. Not sure how their larger international business played into the damages calculation (assuming they can show international damages).
I watched "The Odd Couple" the other night, and the dingy girl asks Felix, a TV newswriter, "where he gets his ideas from." It was only a joke to telegraph "dumb: willing" - but ... of course ... the news we watch is formed by the ideas of the presenters of the news. Many conservatives have decided that most news is fake news, and they're not always wrong -- facts are chosen, other facts are discarded, and presentation is everything and can be used to conceal -- and concealment is the opposite of "news".
So I don't think the Dominion settlement will have the effect, no doubt hoped-for, of "disqualifying" Fox News in its viewers' minds. Of course it would be a fine thing if the reckless carelessness of Fox News caused it to fold, but it would be inequitable if it folded and say, the similarly pernicious CNN -- the pinnacle of idiocy and mediocrity -- persisted.
I often think about the Washington Post's series of exposés of The Nature Conservancy 20 years ago. The Post's crusade reflected their bias that the Conservancy was motivated by the self-interest of *wealthy, elite* members. Its influence has caused conservation groups to avoid efforts that would have benefitted the public as a whole. There are ways the newsmakers shape the news, shape policy, instill orthodoxy - that are more far-reaching than the reputational concerns of a voting machine company.
Josh, I don't want to indulge in wutaboutism, and I agree Fox is in another quantum of egregious falsity, but don't you think e-mails of Chuck Todd or Andrea Mitchell or Jake Tapper dealing with their enthusiastic gullibility towards Stacey Abrams' voter suppression claims would be damning? Or Adam Schiff's carte blanche on intelligence committee "secret info" on Trump and Russia? Fox didn't degenerate in a vacuum, all media has been going this way.
This is the kind of 'spin' Josh was talking about. It used to be that's what you got from talk radio. True facts, but presented with a conservative spin (e.i. classic 1st amendment opinion). "Georgia cleaned out their voter roles of people who have not voted in the last 2 elections" is a true fact. "Because of that, they are suppressing black vote" is an opinion based on that fact.
Where Fox crossed the line was in not presenting any facts, or provably false facts. I don't expect them to stop putting a conservative spin on things ("Trump was indicted by the New York Attorney General in a subjectively weak case" is a provable fact, "Trump is subject to a witch hunt" is a protected opinion based on a disclosed fact).
I think it's a good thing that Fox keeps it's conservative spin. It's also a good thing that they got thoroughly wacked for defamation in this case.
I imagine they will try to be more disciplined going forward and stick to what has worked for them in the past. Lying about Democratic politicians (politicians often times seemingly have little recourse) and lying about amorphous or non-existent organizations like BLM and Antifa where there is no one who clearly has standing to sue.
If nothing else, this will make Fox News more careful in reporting on famously litigious companies like, say, Disney.
I'm just waiting to see how the Dominion lawsuits with NewsMax and OAN also end up going. Those outlets aren't nearly as big as Fox and I don't think they can really afford huge pay outs.
It also taught the Fox employees to use burner phones for text messages in the future. Could you and Ken address the Smartmatic claims in an upcoming epiosde? Specifically how their damage claims compare to Dominion. As I understand it, Fox didn't say as much about Smartmatic, but Smartmatic is a bigger business with bigger theoretical damages. Thanks
I forget if this was in the episode or not, but I asked Ken about this and his view was that Smartmatic likely could not demonstrate damages as large as Dominion could, because Smartmatic's business footprint in the US is quite small (just LA County in the 2020 election), and that that would tend to flow through to a smaller settlement or judgment.
Wondering out loud here: What would happen if the Smartmatic case goes to trial and Fox is found non-liable? It probably wouldn't re-hire Carlson, but would it revert back to its Carlson-adjacent lies?
I thought that their US footprint was small, but they are a bigger company overall. Not sure how their larger international business played into the damages calculation (assuming they can show international damages).
I watched "The Odd Couple" the other night, and the dingy girl asks Felix, a TV newswriter, "where he gets his ideas from." It was only a joke to telegraph "dumb: willing" - but ... of course ... the news we watch is formed by the ideas of the presenters of the news. Many conservatives have decided that most news is fake news, and they're not always wrong -- facts are chosen, other facts are discarded, and presentation is everything and can be used to conceal -- and concealment is the opposite of "news".
So I don't think the Dominion settlement will have the effect, no doubt hoped-for, of "disqualifying" Fox News in its viewers' minds. Of course it would be a fine thing if the reckless carelessness of Fox News caused it to fold, but it would be inequitable if it folded and say, the similarly pernicious CNN -- the pinnacle of idiocy and mediocrity -- persisted.
I often think about the Washington Post's series of exposés of The Nature Conservancy 20 years ago. The Post's crusade reflected their bias that the Conservancy was motivated by the self-interest of *wealthy, elite* members. Its influence has caused conservation groups to avoid efforts that would have benefitted the public as a whole. There are ways the newsmakers shape the news, shape policy, instill orthodoxy - that are more far-reaching than the reputational concerns of a voting machine company.
Josh, I don't want to indulge in wutaboutism, and I agree Fox is in another quantum of egregious falsity, but don't you think e-mails of Chuck Todd or Andrea Mitchell or Jake Tapper dealing with their enthusiastic gullibility towards Stacey Abrams' voter suppression claims would be damning? Or Adam Schiff's carte blanche on intelligence committee "secret info" on Trump and Russia? Fox didn't degenerate in a vacuum, all media has been going this way.
This is the kind of 'spin' Josh was talking about. It used to be that's what you got from talk radio. True facts, but presented with a conservative spin (e.i. classic 1st amendment opinion). "Georgia cleaned out their voter roles of people who have not voted in the last 2 elections" is a true fact. "Because of that, they are suppressing black vote" is an opinion based on that fact.
Where Fox crossed the line was in not presenting any facts, or provably false facts. I don't expect them to stop putting a conservative spin on things ("Trump was indicted by the New York Attorney General in a subjectively weak case" is a provable fact, "Trump is subject to a witch hunt" is a protected opinion based on a disclosed fact).
I think it's a good thing that Fox keeps it's conservative spin. It's also a good thing that they got thoroughly wacked for defamation in this case.
I imagine they will try to be more disciplined going forward and stick to what has worked for them in the past. Lying about Democratic politicians (politicians often times seemingly have little recourse) and lying about amorphous or non-existent organizations like BLM and Antifa where there is no one who clearly has standing to sue.
Succinct, good summary after a week of speculation and post settlement news drips.