Forums
Fox news defamation case
Quick find code: 23-24-711-66278655
Joel
said
:
When I previously said I don't understand the defence of Fox News, I'm specifically referring to this lawsuit and settlement as they themselves acknowledged wrong-doing, so how someone after that fact can challenge if there was indeed wrong-doing, I don't know. That's all I am referring to, specifically.
You've taken reality, and you've applied political bias to it to present the story which doesn't reflect reality.
What Fox said:
Original message details are unavailable.
We acknowledge the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false.
Your version of the story:
Joel said :
Fox News had to settle a defamation lawsuit because they knew damn well they were in the wrong about willingly and knowingly spouting completely baseless lies (as is common place for them) against another company. Joel said :
A news company openly defamed and lied about another company Joel said :
Fox did lie, they acknowledged as much
Where in Fox's statement does it say they admit wrongdoing or admit to lying? They didn't. They stated that "certain claims about Dominion" were false. You don't know which claims are being referenced, or who made those claims.
Yet, you've twisted the statement to be "Fox knew they were lying and acknowledged it", when in reality, the claims being referenced as false were most likely made by other people during the reporting of the stories, and not by Fox News or their reporters themselves, and Fox never acknowledged any wrongdoing.
If you're reporting on a story, and someone provides an interview, how is the wrongdoing of the media outlet for reporting the statements being made by a high level politician, even if those statements are false? If you're reporting on a certain politician, and they're making claims, how is it your fault for reporting their views and claims?
When I previously said I don't understand the defence of Fox News, I'm specifically referring to this lawsuit and settlement as they themselves acknowledged wrong-doing, so how someone after that fact can challenge if there was indeed wrong-doing, I don't know. That's all I am referring to, specifically.
You've taken reality, and you've applied political bias to it to present the story which doesn't reflect reality.
What Fox said:
Original message details are unavailable.
We acknowledge the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false.
Your version of the story:
Joel said :
Fox News had to settle a defamation lawsuit because they knew damn well they were in the wrong about willingly and knowingly spouting completely baseless lies (as is common place for them) against another company. Joel said :
A news company openly defamed and lied about another company Joel said :
Fox did lie, they acknowledged as much
Where in Fox's statement does it say they admit wrongdoing or admit to lying? They didn't. They stated that "certain claims about Dominion" were false. You don't know which claims are being referenced, or who made those claims.
Yet, you've twisted the statement to be "Fox knew they were lying and acknowledged it", when in reality, the claims being referenced as false were most likely made by other people during the reporting of the stories, and not by Fox News or their reporters themselves, and Fox never acknowledged any wrongdoing.
If you're reporting on a story, and someone provides an interview, how is the wrongdoing of the media outlet for reporting the statements being made by a high level politician, even if those statements are false? If you're reporting on a certain politician, and they're making claims, how is it your fault for reporting their views and claims?
11-May-2023 04:37:34
Quick find code: 23-24-711-66278655 Back to Top