MORE DECEPTIVE REPORTING by 
may cost the company billions of dollars.
More
scuttlebutt opinion regarding Biden's dr.ug plan. When I watched Fox News about this they failed to mention that it was an "opinion" article from one of their "own" staff. Its worth reading even if its based upon opinions and not a single FACT. Also you're read about FoxNews complaining in the article that there was no proof to Biden's dr.ug plan at all. I had to laugh about this seeing as for the past 4 years FoxNews never seemed to care about facts at all and in fact is why they are facing a $1.7 billion deformation lawsuit regarding voting machines with their (no proof supported "disinformation campaign in the 2020 election.
It appears Fox News will follow a similar path as it did with the Covid virus attack regarding masks, shots, and social distancing.
Fox News' attorneys have set out the starkest defense yet against the accusation the network defamed an election-technology company when it broadcast false claims that the company had cheated then-President Donald Trump of victory in the 2020 election. The overwhelming majority of Fox's argument was made in sealed motions filed last week asking the presiding judge to dismiss Dominion Voting Systems' $1.6 billion suit before it is to go to trial in April. Yet in supplementary public filings, the contours of the Fox team's reasoning emerge more sharply in focus.
Of the approximately 115 statements on Fox by its hosts and guests that Dominion contends are defamatory, Fox News wrote in its filing, "there is not a single statement for which Dominion can prove every element of its claim for defamation."
In those documents, Fox's attorneys offer "omitted context" for the seemingly incendiary remarks by such hosts as Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, Lou Dobbs and Maria Bartiromo, as well as their featured guests, including Trump and his former campaign attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. That context includes assertions that have long since been debunked and rebutted in dozens of court challenges and by local and state election officials from both parties.
Among them: claims that the use of Sharpie markers in Maricopa County, Arizona, had invalidated the votes cast by Trump supporters because the ink often ******* through the ballots. Allegations of voter fraud in Detroit. The sworn deposition of an anonymous witness who said he was a former member of the Venezuelan presidential security team and accused Dominion of committing election fraud in the U.S. All of these allegations have been disproven. Many were unraveled in real time during the 2020 election season –
often by Fox's own reporters.
Fox News' legal team, however, does not defend them as correct. Instead, its filings suggest that the Fox stars relaying them on the air reflected an appropriate journalistic response to stark claims about the functioning of American democracy, as they involve "questions to a newsmaker on newsworthy subjects" or they "accurately report on pending allegations."
Eddie Perez, board member at the OSET Institute, a non-profit, non-partisan outfit advocating for reliable and transparent election technology, calls the claims about Dominion that were amplified by Fox hosts and peddled by its guests "outlandish." "If anything, because they were so outlandish, they immediately attracted widespread attention and were debunked," Perez says. "They instantly didn't stand up to the light of day."
Fox's bold assertion that Dominion will fail to prove any incidents of defamation does not find universal embrace in legal circles. Lawyers with no involvement in the case pointed to statements on Fox's airwaves that they say gave the Trump camp far too much credence for far too long to claim a mere journalistic sensibility.
"Fox's journalists and managers were repeatedly told the stories about the voting machine were false, over a period of weeks," Lucy Dalglish, the dean of the University of Maryland Merrill College of Journalism, writes in an email for this story. "Quoting the president of the United States and relying on a 'fair report' privilege only gets you so far," says Dalglish, a noted First Amendment advocate and media lawyer. "They didn't just quote Trump. They doubled down and repeatedly reported and opined that Dominion's systems were faulty."
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
More To READ On This ARTICLE ... click on Story Link
What's really really interesting is that Fox News feels that they have the right to report anything they wish under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. Interestingly, Fox News knows the stories (like the Voting Fraud) were not supported by even an ounce of TRUTH, but chose to air these stories continually to sway voting opinions & discissions. So, what do THEY DO? They look to the 1st Amendment to back them up that THEY have a RIGHT to their intentional false reporting. And, bring, in their defense, that they are primarily an Intertainment station, not a NEWS station. They like their toast buttered on both sides of their bread it seems.
How do others see this logic? Is it legal for news sources to intentionally promote incorrect stories stories?
