Some false equivalency being drawn between Rachel Maddow and Tucker Carlson

[Silent3]

By none other than the infamous Glenn Greenwald.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-maddows-viewers

I saw this posted on Quora, and the person posting it immediately twisted this into Maddow's lawyers
arguing, in Tucker-esque fashion, that Rachel Maddow wasn't expected to be taken as a source of truthful news.

At most, depending on how much Greenwald has twisted things or ignored context, even Greenwald is only saying that the judge came to the conclusion that Maddow didn't have to be held to a high standard of factuality (which she does a damn good job of, even if she occassionally makes a mistake.)

Here's an excerpt for those who'd rather not give the above web site any click counts:

MSNBC's top-rated host Rachel Maddow devoted a segment in 2019 to accusing the right-wing cable outlet One America News (OAN) of being a paid propaganda outlet for the Kremlin. Discussing a Daily Beast article which noted that one OAN reporter was a "Russian national” who was simultaneously writing copy for the Russian-owned outlet Sputnik on a freelance contract, Maddow escalated the allegation greatly into a broad claim about OAN's real identity and purpose: “in this case,” she announced, “the most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda."

In response, OAN sued Maddow, MSNBC, and its parent corporation Comcast, Inc. for defamation, alleging that it was demonstrably false that the network, in Maddow's words, “literally is paid Russian propaganda." In an oddly overlooked ruling, an Obama-appointed federal judge, Cynthia Bashant, dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that even Maddow's own audience understands that her show consists of exaggeration, hyperbole, and pure opinion, and therefore would not assume that such outlandish accusations are factually true even when she uses the language of certainty and truth when presenting them (“literally is paid Russian propaganda" ).

[Atticus]

1. Note please that Greenwald QUOTES Rachel but NEVER QUOTES the judge. We don't know WHAT

this "Obama-appointed federal judge" said. We only know what Greenwald SAYS she said.

Hmmm----wonder why.

[Qutzupalotl]

5. Good point. I found this quote:

"For her to exaggerate the facts and call OAN Russian propaganda was consistent with her tone up to that point, and the court finds a reasonable viewer would not take the statement as factual given this context," Bashant wrote. "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion."
https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/may/23/san-diego-judge-dismisses-oans-10-million-defamati/

[SYFROYH]

2. Judge (supposedly): her show consists of exaggeration, hyperbole, and pure opinion

ouch.

[AZProgressive]

3. Rachel Maddow is right

That old The Hill Rising show with Krystal Ball compared maddow to Bill O’Reilly which was a bad comparison just because one is calm while the other is angry & shouting.

If Greenwald is after you it is probably part of some foreign influence operation

[stillcool]

4. out of the dustbin of history

there should be a place where old spinners go to recall their youthful glow.