Post ASo5trAVYYwTE3Exv6 by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
(DIR) More posts by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
(DIR) Post #ASo4n9iE72hEl0Fk2a by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:30:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
#DefamationLaw #FunReadingLegalDocuments Fox News Network's defenseYesterday I wrote 2 threads on the Dominion v. Fox defamation lawsuit.Here: https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_Kanefield/109881090750981456And here: https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_Kanefield/109881144853168118Here is Fox's First Amended Counterclaim showing how Fox intends to defend itself:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23684886-public-version-fnns-first-amended-counterclaim-acceptedThe defense is NOT (as people suggested) "we're not a news network; we are entertainers!" (which probably wouldn't work anyway)1/
(DIR) Post #ASo51LN3YyduyB7GDY by alfredo_liberal@universeodon.com
2023-02-18T14:33:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield it won't work the discovery is undeniable
(DIR) Post #ASo54qUgIygCMfLujI by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:34:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Fox's defense: News outlets have a First Amendment right to report the news, and that includes allegations by the sitting President of the United States and his surrogates alleged that the 2020 election was affected by fraud.In other words, Fox "truthfully reported the president's allegations."From the document: “According to Dominion, Fox News Network has a duty not to truthfully report the President’s allegations, but to suppress them or denounce them as false."2/
(DIR) Post #ASo5EXxA5rZ5l2Ie3s by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:35:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Also from the doc: "Dominion is fundamentally mistaken. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press would be illusory if the preaviling side in a public congroversy could sue the press for giving a forum to the other side.”On other words, Fox’s position: There was a dispute. Fox reported the dispute. Dominion won. Now Dominion wants to sue the press for giving a forum to the losing side.This brings me to a propaganda technique called "noise," widely used in the Soviet Union.3/
(DIR) Post #ASo5YmUVkfLWdbXz8q by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:39:26Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
It's an effective technique: The propagandist doesn't suppress the truth. Instead they elevate lies and place them alongside the truth, appearing to give both equal weight but actually putting a thumb on the scale for the lies.This confuses listeners, and undermines factuality because people don't know what to believe and come to believe that the truth is unknowable.Fox says: We reported both sides. We gave air to Dominion's side, also.4/
(DIR) Post #ASo5hiLoVxZAP3jrV2 by hu_logic@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T14:41:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield In essence - "defamation is not a thing because 1A"
(DIR) Post #ASo5i6Uqk13RI29Puq by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:41:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The technique is called "noise" because the idea is to create so much noise, elevating lies and putting them alongside the truth, that the listeners either believe the lies or become confused and conclude that the truth is unknowable.If enough people conclude that the truth is unknowable, democracy fails (democracy and rule of law require truth / autocracy rests on lies.)The technique is effective because the truth destroyers harness the power of democratic institutions.5/
(DIR) Post #ASo5trAVYYwTE3Exv6 by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:43:13Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Essentially Fox is bringing a counterclaim (this is an amendment of their counterclaim) under New York's anti-slappp statute.About Anti-Slapp laws:SLAPPS are fivolous lawsuit intended to punish First Amended protected speech. Anti-slapp laws preventing people from suing legitimate new sources and driving them out of business for reporting news that they don’t likeYou can bet the same people lying on Fox will sue the Washington Post for publishing unflattering truths.6/
(DIR) Post #ASo5zWrXxwvXzB4nEe by tienle47@mastodon.world
2023-02-18T14:44:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Do propaganda techniques often win in court cases?
(DIR) Post #ASo64AI3JjexQUgVtY by dmiller62@mastodon.world
2023-02-18T14:45:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield I’d like to see (and I’m sure it will have been tallied up by one or both sides) what % of airtime (and “when”, and by “who”) was given to “Dominion’s side”… as in, the truth, Vs wild crazy nut job conspiracy theories and demonstrably false statements.
(DIR) Post #ASo6C7TneOzL1gyM9Q by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:46:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
FOX's claim:Dominion filed a lawsuit claiming $1.6 billion in damages as an attention-grabbing publicity stunt. Fox is protect by New York’s anti-SLAPP law, which is intended to protect news sources from harassment lawsuits or lawsuits filed for publicity.FOX also challenges the $1.6 billion in damages saying that discovery showed Dominion is doing well and even gave bonuses to employees and was never worth anything like 1.6 billion About anti-SLAPP: https://www.nyclu.org/en/legislation/legislative-memo-strengthening-new-yorks-anti-slapp-statute7/
(DIR) Post #ASo6NLC8zwPskU45GC by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:48:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@dmiller62 I think you're right: Any comparison would undermine he defense.But I wonder if it would be a good idea to avoid that framing, which accepts Fox's premise that because they gave airtime to Dominion, all is well.
(DIR) Post #ASo6Z6dewYaL4vXqrI by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T14:50:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hu_logic Dating back to the eighteenth century it's been recognized that defamation lawsuits are allowed under the First Amendment, which doesn't protect certain categories of speech.So that's not really what they're saying.They're doing something more subtle and democracy-harming: A view of news which creates noise instead of seeking the truth.
(DIR) Post #ASo7Am3FvzTaEUTlR2 by dmiller62@mastodon.world
2023-02-18T14:57:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield My guess is the Fox gave little-to-no airtime to anything other than the crazy, during prime time and daytime hours, by all of their prominent hosts. Also likely that the prominent hosts presented no view other than the crazy. They also weren’t “simply reporting”, because on-air, they fully agreed with and embraced what was being said, and repeated it ad-Infinitum.
(DIR) Post #ASo7EYYY3FXtXIv3hI by jmjohnson@mindly.social
2023-02-18T14:58:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield this is Fox’s MO, and their slogan was “fair and balanced”
(DIR) Post #ASo7QX1FalO8FC3SS0 by NoahH@universeodon.com
2023-02-18T15:00:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield It's effective because people smoke too much post modernism. They deconstruct every grand narrative and basis for objectivity in search of an abstract conceptual freedom from the rigid confines of established and mundane reality long before they develop a clue that some of those things they just rejected are necessary to communicate to the rest of the world that oppression isn't just another narrative that one is at liberty to employ like any other since they're all just like, your opinion man.
(DIR) Post #ASo7bOGQU4PcH9Ka2a by TCatInReality@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T15:02:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield @hu_logic Can journalistic ethics be used this dismantle this defenseman? Eg. Presenting both sides requires challenging the factual basis for a claim, which Fox did not do.
(DIR) Post #ASo83l1hRmncyqy9nU by nanowiz@vmst.io
2023-02-18T15:07:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield for always cutting through the gristle!Cheers
(DIR) Post #ASo8x7Cgh6p5gmVOPA by mjf_pro@hachyderm.io
2023-02-18T15:17:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Interesting when one broadens the discussion to whether “Side B is lying, side A is not” is an ascertainable truth in and of itself. If it is, and if Fox “truthfully” reported both sides of the controversy *but not* that one side of the controversy is built on a foundation of 🐄 💩, then they are not reporting the full truth, in fact they’re burying an important part of it — at Dominion’s expense.
(DIR) Post #ASo91xbBpeg3LeHCFM by GreenFire@climatejustice.social
2023-02-18T15:18:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Fox News is trying to defend themselves in court by asserting that there are two sides to the truth?
(DIR) Post #ASoA13yCl5qmlyB41g by ProfWords@climatejustice.social
2023-02-18T15:29:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Doesn’t that mean that this hinges on whether #Fox was simply telling their viewers what the President said or whether they were reporting it independently, too? Like, couldn’t Dominion get an advantage if the found several examples of Fox personalities hyping the lie beyond simply stating that the President’s people said it?
(DIR) Post #ASoAvM88QVUTJPfH2O by timo21@mastodon.sdf.org
2023-02-18T15:39:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Didn't other lawsuits involving Fox end up that Fox is not a news organization, but is an entertainment business?
(DIR) Post #ASoD6JKVNXuViinnRw by Perry313@freeradical.zone
2023-02-18T16:03:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield The job of media is to separate the signal from the noise. Unfortunately, social media makes that more difficult and conventional media is either unwilling or unable to take up the slack.
(DIR) Post #ASoFAyIBDsqPpW44oK by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T16:27:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@timo21 Really all Dominion has to do is prove each element of defamation. They may use that to counter Fox's defenses or show inconsistency (again, disclaimer: I did criminal and dependency law, not First Amendment or civil litigation)
(DIR) Post #ASoFuvbrWqPkpaBWWu by david1@mastodon.world
2023-02-18T16:35:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Fox’s argument is nonsense. Publishers can absolutely be held liable for what is said in their publications. If Fox is right, there would be no need for Section 230 because it would be a constitutional right.
(DIR) Post #ASoFx7apwgP2ZmkcoS by CaliGal@mstdn.party
2023-02-18T16:35:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield It isn't surprising that FOX is using Russian propaganda techniques to try to confuse the issue. I don't think it will work. There is plenty of evidence proving they knew it wasn't true and reported on it as if it was. Had they reported "news" of the President saying Dominion was involved in stealing the election although evidence shows that isn't true, then they would have a leg to stand on, but they didn't report it that way. They're hosed.
(DIR) Post #ASoHl4T1wRNZJZTtnU by RichardsonsRubicon@social.vivaldi.net
2023-02-18T16:56:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield The propaganda technique works great. It got Brexit done. many people wanted it yet couldn't give valid reasons as all of them were false at the time and overwhelmingly proven so later. Yet many still want their Brexit.
(DIR) Post #ASoKffZZN4fgWJej1U by westhisup@social.linux.pizza
2023-02-18T17:28:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield I have heard of organizations and/or people use a defense of “No reasonable person would believe my statement and our/my show is for entertainment purposes only”. May I ask if you think they will also use a defense like this or is this somewhat similar?
(DIR) Post #ASoKoj5XfYaC1vvgFE by hu_logic@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T17:30:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield But that's not what they were doing though - they were not simply reporting that "Mr. Trump is claiming election fraud. Fox News has not been able to independently verify these claims"Instead, they had hosts and news anchors repeat and amplify these lies, knowing full well they were false.Moreover, they kept platforming and amplifying straight up batshit crazy voices (Team Kraken) w/o questioning or pushing back against their claims.And let's not forget this gem...
(DIR) Post #ASoNaxxHtiFrwnCNUm by JeffDanielswpg@thecanadian.social
2023-02-18T18:01:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield It's so bloody disturbing that this Pandora has been unboxed. Allowed. Enabled. The concept of truth becoming inaccessible. Everything blurred. Troubling every time it enters my mind.
(DIR) Post #ASoNeqlaZD5woIZwDg by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T18:02:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@westhisup They seem to be going a different direction: asserting their right as a news organization to "truthfully" report a sitting president's allegations.
(DIR) Post #ASoNhuYivHhNRQ1LXs by hu_logic@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T17:42:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@TCatInReality @Teri_Kanefield But they were not even presenting both sides.They took a side, and presented it as fact.
(DIR) Post #ASoNhv4yzLVF3T76pM by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T18:02:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hu_logic @TCatInReality Their claim is that they also gave airtime to Dominion's "side"Yeah, it's the "both sides are valid" and "We just report what people say" defense which I hope won't fly.
(DIR) Post #ASoNz8GvBy2stTuD4a by bubbajet@mastodon.world
2023-02-18T18:05:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield It’s the “we report, you decide” defense. Ugh.
(DIR) Post #ASoREIb1OAlf7VEMwy by karabaic@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T18:42:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Does the discovery show that #Fox planted the rumors to be spouted by TFG, in a kind of “reverse Cheney”? Is that a possible #Dominion tactic in response? For those who don’t know: #DickCheney planted misleading info, without attribution, about Sadaam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction with reporters like #JudithMiller of the NYT in 2003, and then cited her reporting as evidence.
(DIR) Post #ASoRMTTQpWwnAmZy0e by karabaic@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T18:43:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Does the discovery show that #Fox planted the rumors to be spouted by TFG, in a kind of “reverse Cheney”? Is that a possible #Dominion tactic in response? For those who don’t know: #DickCheney planted misleading info, without attribution, about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction with reporters like #JudithMiller of the NYT in 2003, and then cited her reporting as evidence.
(DIR) Post #ASoTrpB2O5OpN03Hay by schreibdave@mastodon.sdf.org
2023-02-18T19:11:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield If Fox can demonstrate that the majority of their coverage started with "Trump says" and if they could show that they gave Dominion ample opportunity to respond, could Fox prevail? I would think so.
(DIR) Post #ASoUSePrMKm4i5Xr9s by Alexandrad1@mas.to
2023-02-18T19:18:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield you elegantly reworded the infamous maxim of Steve Bannon. 😄
(DIR) Post #ASoUoRRgGRyIqxmt3w by westhisup@social.linux.pizza
2023-02-18T19:22:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Thank you for taking the time to clarify this. I really appreciate it.
(DIR) Post #ASoVHXsfPvSnD4HuaG by ChrisBoese@newsie.social
2023-02-18T19:27:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield @hu_logic @thepoliticalcat TRUTH remains the strongest protection against claims of libel and defamation. If you don’t have it, you’re already on shaky ground
(DIR) Post #ASoXM8vVp69lAjwGRs by GregCirillo@newsie.social
2023-02-18T19:50:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Methinks that if they could get the damages number down to low-eight figures, they would gladly settle.
(DIR) Post #ASoXVOzFTsCpaY6Lxo by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-18T19:52:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
There is case law that a statement is still defamatory if something someone else says is republished as if it is true, and too often Fox did that.
(DIR) Post #ASoYQMrw1n0ZWfqNvc by TammyGentzel@awscommunity.social
2023-02-18T20:02:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Having watched their coverage on a daily basis, I can definitively state they did not simply report claims. They used their own reporters in the field to “demonstrate” election tampering. Further, they repeatedly broadcast accusations as true and factual. As part of each segment, their staff did not say, “If true, horrific,” or “Alleged.” Instead, they said things like, “The Dominion machine has serious design flaws,” and “Groundbreaking new evidence” (with no counterpoint).
(DIR) Post #ASod89AshivPbzpwyu by peatbog@med-mastodon.com
2023-02-18T20:55:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield @dmiller62 Liars often say contradictory things to maintain plausible deniability --eg quacks who say, "This isn't medical advice but if you're suffering symptom A, product X will boost your immune system!The contradictory presentation will impact reasonable people in a predictable way: they'll conclude the speaker recommends X for symptom A in spite of the "not medical" disclaimer.Viewers likely concluded Fox presenters said Dominion stole the 2020 election for Biden.
(DIR) Post #ASoh1LbAVtMDvx965g by SandyO@urbanists.social
2023-02-18T21:39:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield A reminder, TV Networks run by adverising products viewers want, attracting more viewers. Viewership numbers are built into most TV distribution systems. If you don’t watch, adverising revenue falls, stations close and their licenses get sold to a new organization.If you really want change, boycott the Network. Stop watching the advertisements. Stop talking about it. Especially here! Talking about Fox just sends more viewers. Stop feeding the troll!
(DIR) Post #ASorMAdNTNabYEkN4y by TCatInReality@mastodon.social
2023-02-18T23:34:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield @hu_logic But is it a valid defence to say "I just reported what a side said" when journalistic ethics require a certain amount of scrutiny and evidence?Hours and hours of platforming a view that they know has no evidence - and without any scrutiny - seems like a help for the defamation claim.
(DIR) Post #ASoroWc5Lf81pJfA8W by GreenFire@climatejustice.social
2023-02-18T23:40:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Good description, but I'm going to put the term and description together in one post.Fox’s position: There was a dispute. Fox reported the dispute. Dominion won. Now Dominion wants to sue the press for giving a forum to the losing side.This brings Teri Kanefield to the propaganda technique called "noise," widely used in the Soviet Union.It's an effective technique: The propagandist doesn't suppress the truth. Instead they elevate lies and place them alongside the truth, appearing to give both equal weight but actually putting a thumb on the scale for the lies.This confuses listeners, and undermines factuality because people don't know what to believe and come to believe that the truth is unknowable.Fox says (basically): "We reported both sides. We gave air to Dominion's side, also."
(DIR) Post #ASovr8MONQz1IBp1tI by anathema_device@bne.social
2023-02-19T00:25:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield how damaging are the Fox internal messages that show they deliberately changed reporting to combat the Newsmax threat and *not* because they got new information? Doesn't that dynamite the entire "just reporting differing opinions schtick"
(DIR) Post #ASowxtKKlhKweIe52G by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-19T00:37:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@TCatInReality @hu_logic Journalistic ethics don't really enter into it. The plaintiff just has to prove the elements of the crime. I will have my weekly blog post ready soon and it should be clearer.
(DIR) Post #ASp0tsGTAxRc0qB5fM by deriamis@mstdn.social
2023-02-19T01:21:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Uhhh… I’m a little confused here. Fox’s counterclaim is that they were “reporting the controversy,” but the lawsuit depends upon not *what* they were reporting but *how* it was presented. The counterclaim seems to admit a dispute of fact that defeats a 1A argument while at the same time not addressing the original claim. Am I right here, or…?
(DIR) Post #ASp1N86xKzgJYdg6gS by Teri_Kanefield@law-and-politics.online
2023-02-19T01:27:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@deriamis yup, what frequently happens is that the two sides present different facts.Then it's up to the jury (the fact finders) to decide which side is right about what happened.
(DIR) Post #ASp9oW2LI3DHDJ5cgK by Catawu@mastodon.social
2023-02-19T03:01:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield They knowingly put false information out there, using people they knew were corrupt/liars, and in that respect, regardless of ‘both sides’, they were treating lies as valid information. That is willful misrepresentation.
(DIR) Post #ASpAQZu7MMuADDONVo by Catawu@mastodon.social
2023-02-19T03:08:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield Part of the suit is to penalize FOX who profited off of their lies, and that creates a $$ amount beyond the ‘worth’ of the company laying suit against them. Other factors are (despite profits on Dominion’s part) harm to future contracts, and potentially permanently damaging the reputation of a company, preventing it from enjoying future business/growth. And it was done for spite, profit, not for ‘cause’.
(DIR) Post #ASpCUIrQrt5WQ62YG8 by wa7iut@mastodon.radio
2023-02-19T03:31:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield does Fox premeditatedly develop propaganda out of a theory of propaganda?
(DIR) Post #ASpMxbG8XcGBQBChhQ by privacat@dataprotection.social
2023-02-19T05:29:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_KanefieldSo the effective takeaway I'm getting is that Fox News is a noise generator for TFG and the right?