If that is the case, then how can it be logically called “Fox News”?
Shouldn’t truth in advertising be apply and its name be changed to “Fox Hyperbole”?
So Plaintiff is denied any opportunity to prove the damage to her reputation among Carlson’s actual audience?
As a factual matter as you get older it is harder to recall where you heard something. So harder to discount because it came from a source prone to lying. AKA ‘exaggerating.’
Exactly, this should be called “The Assholes immunity from Defamation rule”.
The initial of his first name is actually an “F.”
I guess adult film stars are public figures, since they publicize their figures :rimshot:
Someone needs to come up with an accurate (and PG-rated) descriptor for what Faux News peddles. Something similar to Colbert’s “truthiness.” Maybe “Fox Newsish” or “Fox Statements.”
1 Like
1 Like
Bing, Bing, Bing, we have the first winner. This is a Trump judge. There is no legal principle that you have been on a “News Channel” and lie because, oh well, you are a conservative hac.
There is a well established test which is to look at the actual words. If they were expressed as “opinion” then it is somewhat protected, but what Tucker said was not expressed that way. To then basically say “well everything he says is no actionable, because of who he is” serves no legal or public purpose, and is not the law.
The 2nd Circuit will overturn this ruling.
“Rhetorical hyperbole” is what passes as the difference between “News” and “Entertainment” nowadays in America. Unfortunately, Fox “News” viewers aren’t told of that difference or taught the distinction. They think they’re being told the Truth when they watch Fox “News”, but are really only being fed “Entertainment”. (This was also the outcome of a much earlier lawsuit against Fox “News”.)
Unfortunately, there is one more subtlety here that the court failed to convey, and that is that the “Entertainment” Fox “News” viewers are being spoon-fed is actually “Propaganda”.
Democracy lies bleeding in our hands.
I don’t disagree with you, but this has been known for a long, long time now.
We call them “MAGAts” now, but these are the same people that readily accepted the fabrications against John Kerry a la Swift Boat.
When Jimmy Carter told them to put on a sweater to keep the heating bill from going up during the energy crisis, they assumed a fetal position. Uncle Raygun came along and said “That mean ol’ liberal thinks there is a limit on resources–there isn’t!” They fall for their impulses and entitlement every single, damn time. To quote Fleetwood Mac, “Tell me lies. Tell me sweet, little lies.”
The best gift we on the left have given the right is convincing ourselves that our votes don’t matter. If we had mandatory voting in this country (per Australia), we’d never hear the phrase “Republican majority” again. People despise them, but people don’t vote.
The opinion is probably right given our expansive view of free speech, but it really out to burn. Essentially the court said you can’t take anything Tucker says as being factual. That is a polite way of saying Tucker is a well known liar.
This ruling is F***ing elitist trash! This judge just assumed that because she and others of her ilk recognize Carlson as a performance artist, everyone does. I’m going to argue there are many many people who view Carlson as a prophet and what he utters gospel.
Or “rhetorical hyperbole”?
Wait… so if it’s not delivered as “news”, it can’t possibly be “defamation”?!? To me that’s ‘pretzel logic’ defined.
if someone goes on national television and defames you, using “rhetorical hyperbole” or otherwise, it shouldn’t matter whether it’s “opinion” or “factual reporting”. Defamation is defamation, no matter the form or forum its delivered in…
Clearly just my opinion, but… She’s yet another Trump-appointed judge. The Senate confirmed her with 91 votes. Oops.
Well, it’s my political opinion that Tucker has marital relations with rams and that his penis is swollen to over 4 times its usual one inch by a variety of sexually transmitted diseases which have already affected his brain.
So there are 4 words in there that will save me from defamatory action? I’m gonna try that out on Wikipedia.
Yeah, problem is that what they said was “Tucker is a well known liar, and is therefore immune to the consequences of lies.”
Right up there with Trump’s son being too stupid to be prosecuted.
Different rules for some, if they’ve successfully manged to lower the bar.
1 Like
The beeyatch is a tRump appointee. So much for the rule of law.
So now it’s ok to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater if it’s a joke? And irrelevant to that are the people trampled to death in the process?
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a defamation suit brought against Fox News by former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who alleged having an affair with Donald Trump before he became president.
Maybe the judge thought McDougal was a “Karen.”
Oh now you’re being silly.
It’s perfectly fine to scream “fire” in a crowded movie theater if, for some reason, you’re known to shout “fire” in a movie theater pretty much every time you go.
1 Like