For those who understand the points of the lawsuit filed by ex-Foxnews reporters

[Baitball Blogger]

against Foxnews, what were valid points that came out of the lawsuit that could support the position that Foxnews was peddling propaganda. And was this case the reason Foxnews dropped the “Fair and Balanced” motto?

[SamKnause]

1. I am not an expert.

I am not an attorney.

The way I understood the ruling was the news does not have to be factual.



Another ruling:


The way I understand how Tucker Carlson remains on Fox is the judge ruled nobody would think

the things he says are based in reality. No one would believe the things he says.

[Walleye]

2. I think we could provide documentation that shows millions of people believe him

[SamKnause]

3. We certainly could.

I am sure the judge knew that as well.

[Baitball Blogger]

4. So lawyers for the plaintiffs have to line up MAGAs to testify that

They believe Tucker and co., and keep the testimonials coming until the judge gets worn down?

[SamKnause]

5. I don't know how it is suppose to work.

I was just reporting on what I read and heard on CNN and MSNBC.

The judge ruled no one is meant to, or would take Tucker Carlson seriously.

The justice system in this country leaves much to be desired.

[onenote]

6. As far as I know, there was no such lawsuit.

I suspect that what you're thinking about is the 2014 lawsuit brought by two former reporters (a married couple) for WTVT-TV in Tampa FL. That lawsuit has, incorrectly, been described on line as a suit against Fox News in which it was argued that Fox has the right to lie.

In fact, the suit had nothing to do with Fox News. It was brought against a Fox-owned over-the-air broadcast television station. It was a breach of contract suit by the two reporters who had worked for months on a story about a synthetic growth hormone developed by Monsanto. The story was never aired and the two were fired by the station in 1997. In 2000, the plaintiffs, alleging that they were fired because they threatened to go to the FCC with a complaint that the station engaged in "news distortion,' won a judgment against the station in a lower state court. In 2003, a state appeals court reversed the judgment.

There was nothing in the case that had anything to do with Fox News, and it was decided fourteen years before Fox News dropped the "fair and balanced" motto.

If you're thinking of some other lawsuit, I'll need more information. The only one I can think of that remotely fits the description in the OP is the one I described.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/sep/10/facebook-posts/facebook-post-claims-fox-admits-they-lie-have-righ/

[Baitball Blogger]

7. The facts are close, but I suspect what I remember may have come from

Intentional misinformation. I heard they were asked to report news that they knew was false and they refused to do it. Hence the firing, followed by a lawsuit.