Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mahatmakanejeeves

(56,884 posts)
Wed May 27, 2020, 03:24 PM May 2020

Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Against Fox News Over Coronavirus Coverage

Last edited Thu May 28, 2020, 07:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: Deadline, via Erik Wemple

Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Against Fox News Over Coronavirus Coverage

By Ted Johnson
May 27, 2020 12:05pm

A Washington state judge has tossed out a public interest group's lawsuit against Fox News, claiming that the network violated consumer protection laws via its coronavirus coverage.

The Washington League for Increased Transparency and Ethics, or WASH LITE, sued the network in early April, claiming that its coverage violated the state's consumer protection laws by engaging in a "campaign of deception and omission regarding the danger of the international proliferation of the novel coronavirus." Also named in the lawsuit were parent Fox Corp. and two channel distributors, AT&T and Comcast, as well as Rupert Murdoch.

Judge Brian McDonald wrote that the public interest group's "professed goal in this lawsuit -- to ensure that the public receives accurate information about the coronavirus and COVID-19 -- is laudable. However, the means employed here, a [consumer protection] claim against a cable news channel, runs afoul of the protections of the First Amendment."

In its motion to dismiss, Fox News outlined instances where where its hosts warned of the severity of the crisis. The Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and NCTA -- The Internet & Television Association filed an amicus brief in the case in support of the network.

{snip}

Read more: https://deadline.com/2020/05/coronavirus-fox-news-sean-hannity-trish-regan-1202944193/



I don't want to hear any complaints. If 1A doesn't protect Fox News, it doesn't protect anyone. This isn't a popularity contest.

Hat tip, Erik Wemple

A Washington state judge has dismissed the lawsuit by nonprofit group WashLITE against Fox News over coronavirus coverage. Complaint runs afoul of the First Amendment, ruled the judge.


22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Against Fox News Over Coronavirus Coverage (Original Post) mahatmakanejeeves May 2020 OP
An Inslee appointee. sandensea May 2020 #1
It was clearly the right decision. onenote May 2020 #10
The Faux pas May 2020 #2
The right to confuse, deceive, etc was upheld by SCOTUS GeorgeGist May 2020 #3
Depends on what you mean by "not too long ago" onenote May 2020 #11
they should have gone after RW radio for yelling HOAX in a covid theater certainot May 2020 #4
Such a suit would fail on the same grounds that this one did. Jedi Guy May 2020 #14
rw talk radio monopoly should not be considered part of the free speech spectrum certainot May 2020 #18
I suspected I was inviting a rant, and I was correct. Jedi Guy May 2020 #19
you think yelling fire in a crowded theater certainot May 2020 #20
You do realize that the fire in a crowded theater thing is nonsense, right? Jedi Guy May 2020 #21
rw radio made this supreme court possible as it made much media deregulation possible certainot May 2020 #22
You are aware that the FCC has no authority over cable or satellite aren't you? dware May 2020 #16
i was talking about radio stations because rw radio's not part of the free speech spectrum but certainot May 2020 #17
Fox isn't a news channel. It's an entertainment channel. louis-t May 2020 #5
False. Been debunked many times onenote May 2020 #9
does this mean anyone else can start lying through their teeth samsingh May 2020 #6
Only Five? ProfessorGAC May 2020 #8
*sigh* melm00se May 2020 #12
Deeply amusing coming from someone with "Facts First" as their signature. N/T Jedi Guy May 2020 #15
As I predicted when it was first brought up. Its just not going to fly in a court. oldsoftie May 2020 #7
Wemple is on Fox News's side, and I'm surprised WP has him on the payroll. Have a look over his OnDoutside May 2020 #13

onenote

(42,374 posts)
10. It was clearly the right decision.
Thu May 28, 2020, 07:21 AM
May 2020

There was no way that lawsuit had any chance to survive given the first amendment. As a unanimous Supreme Court said over 45 years ago, “A responsible press is an undoubtedly desirable goal, but press responsibility is not mandated by the Constitution and like many other virtues it cannot be legislated.” Miami Herald v. Tornillo, 418 US 241 (1974)

onenote

(42,374 posts)
11. Depends on what you mean by "not too long ago"
Thu May 28, 2020, 07:23 AM
May 2020

In 1974, a unanimous Supreme Court stated that “A responsible press is an undoubtedly desirable goal, but press responsibility is not mandated by the Constitution and like many other virtues it cannot be legislated.” Miami Herald v Tornillo, 418 US 241 (1974).

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
4. they should have gone after RW radio for yelling HOAX in a covid theater
Wed May 27, 2020, 04:28 PM
May 2020

all those stations need to lose their licenses but the FCC won't do it

they need to be sued by survivors in a class action suit

Jedi Guy

(3,171 posts)
14. Such a suit would fail on the same grounds that this one did.
Thu May 28, 2020, 07:52 PM
May 2020

As OP said, either the First Amendment protects everyone, or it protects no one. You don't get to muzzle them just because you hate them.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
18. rw talk radio monopoly should not be considered part of the free speech spectrum
Fri May 29, 2020, 08:57 AM
May 2020

all other media forms liberals complain about have alternatives a click away. the main problem and the one liberals and dems ignore, rw radio, does not. in most parts of the us there are no free easy alts for politics. unfortunately progressive leadership lives in cities and have no clue.

does the first amendment cover shouting HOAX! in a covid theater? while some discussion can be had about the right not to believe 98% of scientists are correct about global warming and it's okay for EVERY RW radio host to have to deny global warming, is there any reason to allow a 95% talk radio monopoly on stations licensed to operate in the public interest to tell 50 mil a week for 2 months that COVID is a liberal hoax?

you can't keep free speech or net neutrality while ignoring and allowing what the US military psyops manual would call a classic propaganda operation disinform 50 mil a week with coordinated messaging used to destroy that freedom

it's clear the republican FCC won't fix this and it's been the biggest political mistake in history that democrats and liberals ignore talk radio. all the advertisers on those stations need to be boycotted until the only ones left say they support trump, global warming and covid denial - because that's what they're supporting

been hearing it's just free speech for 30 years while democracy falls apart and democrats blame symptoms. city-dwelling free speech purists help push the idiocy that that monopoly is just an expression of market demand, the talkers on it are just entertainers expressing political views people want to hear, and the fairness doctrine was a mistake.

the recent article here is one of very very few putting any blame on talk radio while the left chases its tail and blames symptoms like fox, or money in politics, or voter suppression, or media consolidation - all of which democracy was designed to regulate/fix but can't because we let 1500 unchallenged coordinated radio stations blast the country with corporate-coordinated messaging for 30 years

and it should be clear that putin has been using his version of Voice of America at least since 2008

Jedi Guy

(3,171 posts)
19. I suspected I was inviting a rant, and I was correct.
Fri May 29, 2020, 10:14 AM
May 2020

My point from my previous comment stands, despite all the ranting.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
20. you think yelling fire in a crowded theater
Fri May 29, 2020, 10:20 AM
May 2020

is okay? on stations licensed to operate in the public interest?

my point is it doesn't matter what a supreme court says because it will never get there.

the tragedy is americans think they can support free speech and have a democracy while ignoring rw talk radio - these are the consequences now

Jedi Guy

(3,171 posts)
21. You do realize that the fire in a crowded theater thing is nonsense, right?
Fri May 29, 2020, 01:35 PM
May 2020

That phrase was part of a 1909 SCOTUS case involving a "clear and present danger" posed by the speech in question. It was replaced 60 years later with the test being refined to determine whether the speech would provoke "imminent lawless action."

Unfortunately for your argument it does matter what SCOTUS thinks. And if it doesn't matter what the court says, why are you using what it said to bolster your argument? Oh right, because you like it even though it's wrong.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
22. rw radio made this supreme court possible as it made much media deregulation possible
Fri May 29, 2020, 02:23 PM
May 2020

and a new Fairness Doctrine impossible.

that is why ignoring it and expecting free speech and net neutrality and demonopolization of media is so uselesss and pointless until rw radio is fixed.

that is why democrats have to stop ignoring it and use free speech means to destroy that dominant propaganda monopoly whether you believe corporations are people, money is free speech or not, and democrats are importing millions of illegal aliens to vote for them or not..

all other reforms and reregulation democrats and progressives want will be much easier if americans force the ad industry to democratize talk radio and 1500 coordinated radio stations aren't all yelling in chorus, for instance, about the thugs in minneapolis, the dem officials let all this happen, trump should get special counsel to investigate the obama admin, the voting was rigged, and so on.

it reallly doesnt matter what you or i think about the limits of free speech are or should be, whether media monopolies like in radio should be considered part of the free speech spectrum, or what the SCOTUS would do, but it does matter if we keep letting ignorant racist lying suicidal shits like limbaugh yell over millions of informed citizens, protestors, activists, create and manage made-to-order pro-corporate constituencies for billionaire and russian think tanks, and decide who is and isn't acceptable in the senate, the supremes, and the white house, merely because they are loud.

dware

(12,092 posts)
16. You are aware that the FCC has no authority over cable or satellite aren't you?
Thu May 28, 2020, 09:28 PM
May 2020

There is no license to pull, as there is no license to broadcast over cable or satellite, and the FCC has zero authority over cable or satellite.

A Class Action Suit would also fail in the courts, it would run afoul of the 1A.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
17. i was talking about radio stations because rw radio's not part of the free speech spectrum but
Fri May 29, 2020, 08:35 AM
May 2020

it's clear the FCC won't do it.

does the first amendment cover shouting HOAX! in a covid theater? while some discussion can be had about the right not to believe 98% of scientists are correct about global warming and it's okay for EVERY RW radio host to have to deny global warming, is there any reason to allow a 95% talk radio monopoly on stations licensed to operate in the public interest to tell 50 mil a week for 2 months that COVID is a liberal hoax?

a 1000 -1500 stations out there with podcasts and other recording available that would show with very few exceptions all their talkers followed the limbaugh lead calling it a hoax for 2 months, enabling trump and causing many 1000s more deaths.

been hearing it's just free speech for 30 years while democracy falls apart and democrats blame symptoms and free speech purists helped push the idiocy that that monopoly is just an expression of market demand, the talkers on it are just entertainers expressing political views people want to hear, and the fairness doctrine was a mistake.

you can't keep free speech or net neutrality while ignoring and allowing what the military psyops manual calls a classic propaganda operation disinform 50 mil a week with coordinated messaging used to destroy that freedom

and it should be clear that putin has been using his version of Voice of America at least since 2008

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
6. does this mean anyone else can start lying through their teeth
Wed May 27, 2020, 04:54 PM
May 2020

like i heard sean hannity murdered 5 prostitutes?

melm00se

(4,972 posts)
12. *sigh*
Thu May 28, 2020, 07:44 AM
May 2020

While "public" figures have a steep hill to prove libel, the key is if you know/knew acted
“with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” The NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY v. (1964).

Trample the 1st Amendment at your peril.

oldsoftie

(12,410 posts)
7. As I predicted when it was first brought up. Its just not going to fly in a court.
Wed May 27, 2020, 05:44 PM
May 2020

PUBLIC opinion is much more damaging than a ourt judgement anyway

OnDoutside

(19,906 posts)
13. Wemple is on Fox News's side, and I'm surprised WP has him on the payroll. Have a look over his
Thu May 28, 2020, 06:23 PM
May 2020

articles over the past year.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge Throws Out Lawsuit ...