Amazing.
Yes, it can happen. I don't credit ethics. I credit plaintiffs.
Fox doesn't want to be sued again.
 |
| CLICK LINK: https://cdn.jwplayer.com/previews/NddHcBuL |
The clip is just over one minute. You will probably need to click the speaker-shaped sound icon at the bottom of the video screen.
Dominion, the voting tabulating machine company, settled a lawsuit with Fox for nearly $800 million. Smartmatic has a pending lawsuit seeking $2.7 billion. Like Dominion, they claim Fox left unchallenged defamatory statements about them that Fox knew were untrue. Fox hosts don't want to disturb their audiences with information that contradicts Trump. But the threat of lawsuits is a powerful incentive to do so anyway. It isn't journalistic ethics at work. Those failed Fox. Fox doesn't want another expensive judgment in favor of a plaintiff.
A preview of coming posts:
A lawsuit by an injured party — or fear of one — shapes behavior. I saw it first-hand in my career in the investment industry. I saw another example of it earlier this month, this time involving a controversial Medford law firm, the RISE Law Group. The law firm primarily does "family law," i.e. divorces.
Watching a contentious trial was a "bucket list" activity for me. It lasted eight days. The trial raised issues of fiduciary duty, reasonable fees, billing practices, collection practices against a client's unpaid bill, motions to require the recusal of judges, and reasonable activity by an attorney given the totality of the situation. The RISE law group partners argue they are providing good advocacy for their clients, but a partner acknowledged in court that the firm is subject to widespread criticism within the local legal community. Some controversial fee-generating things an attorney might do are beyond the ability of judges or professional organizations to stop; what the attorneys are doing might be perfectly legal. The remedy for the local legal community could be a sympathetic plaintiff with a strong case. Or maybe the case is not strong. That is why there was a trial.
I will be writing about this.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]
14 comments:
It would seem remiss not to also mention CPAC, since it provides a window into the madness that passes for thinking in today’s GOP. This year’s theme was finishing what they started on Jan. 6. As one of their speakers said to rabid cheers: “Welcome to the end of democracy. We are here to overthrow it completely. We didn’t get all the way there on January 6, but we will endeavor to get rid of it and replace it with this, right here,” he said, holding up a cross. “All glory to God.”
As Biden said, the coming election is a battle for America’s soul. We can keep it a republic or surrender it to Trump’s deplorable confederacy of racist traitors. If we choose the latter, Trump has promised to fill the government with his malevolent minions and sic them on his critics and opponents. Peter and his blog could be in trouble.
I don't ther is any "could" about what will more likely than not happen to voices like Peter Sage should the current Republican Party take power in November. Your quote from CPAC should ring alarm bells all across the Country, because when someone tells you what they are, believe them. As I recall, the participants at that CPAC konclave cheered lustily at the very remarks you quoted.
The problem is, Trump‘s appeal is not fact-based. It’s emotion-based.
Counteracting Trump requires a similarly emotion-based appeal, something that the current version of Biden is not especially good at.
Governance in the U.S. is supposed to be based on the rule of law. Those who would prefer it emotion-based should consider relocating to where Trump's role model throws opponents out windows and murders them in gulags.
in a democracy, everyone gets to vote how they want to, whether it’s intellectually- or legally- or emotionally-based.
It’s not a question of “prefer”; reality doesn’t care about “what’s supposed to be.”
Fear is a powerful emotion and Putin certainly makes a strong, emotion-based case for his re-election, but it’s a far cry from democracy. That may be how Trump and his chumps would like to run our government, but God forbid Democrats stoop to that level. It’s bad enough having one party peddling fear, anger and hatred, something “Biden is not especially good at.” That’s why we “prefer” him: we do care about “what’s supposed to be.”
No degree of what anyone cares about is going to alter the nature of reality.
Democracy is rule by the people; the people we actually have, not the people someone wishes we had.
In reality, the U.S. is a republic governed by the rule of law. Hopefully Trump will be held accountable by it whether his cult likes it or not.
In reality, Mike and I seem to be talking past each other in a stubborn contest to see who can have the last word.
Peter should probably make a special place on his blog where the two of us can continue to play this stupid game out of the sight of everyone else. 😱😀
Our inability to understand something doesn't necessarily make IT stupid.
Excellent points, Mike.
Michael, I didn't see Mike saying people shouldn't vote based on emotion. People can vote based on whatever they want (I oppose anything endorsed by the Chamber).
The problem is when emotion takes the place of fact, which is at the heart of TFG's cult and every conspiracy fantasy know to man.
“Our inability to understand something doesn't necessarily make IT stupid.”
And the stupid game continues…
“The problem is when emotion takes the place of fact, which is at the heart of TFG's cult and every conspiracy fantasy know to man.”
Voters are going to vote however they want to. Most people aren’t that rational. Many of them are emotion-driven.
You can either figure out how to appeal to the actual voters we have, or you can whine about how you could win if only we had different voters.
Too many of the actual voters we have are True Believers in the Republican Party's many lies such as the "stolen election" and the Great Replacement. They wildly applaud anti-American comments, such as the quote above from CPAC. The GOP can have them. We need at least one party that openly believes in facts.
Post a Comment