DE - Dominion Voting Systems vs. Fox News, $1.6B Defamation Trial for 2020 election lies, 17 Apr 2023 *Settled $787m* + add’l trials

[JerseyGirl]

Fox News Heads to Trial in Peril: “No Advantage for Dominion to Settle Now”

It’s time for Dominion Voting Systems to make its case against Fox News in its $1.6 billion defamation suit. The election-system company has identified 20 occasions it was demonized on Fox after the 2020 election. Can Dominion prove Fox did it on purpose?

www.vanityfair.com

Mo Elleithee, a former spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, joined the network in 2016 because, he says, he wanted Fox viewers to hear from an actual Democrat, not just Republican caricatures of liberals. In the run-up to the election in 2020, “I was doing hits anywhere from three to five days a week,” Elleithee tells me. He re-upped his commentator contract a few days before Trump lost. “But then in the immediate aftermath,” he says, “as election denialism was really starting to gain traction and take hold, I found myself being put on air with election deniers.” He put a stop to it, refusing to “debate” a made-up side. “I was very aggressive in pushing back on election denialism,” he says. And then, the Fox producers stopped calling. He remained a paid contributor, but averaged just one segment a month, he recalls. “They just stopped booking me.” When Fox offered a contract renewal last December, Elleithee declined. Fox had no comment on Elleithee’s departure.

 

[Lilibet]

APR 13, 2023

Jury selection underway in Dominion's $1.6 billion defamation case against Fox News

Jury selection is underway in Dominion's $1.6 billion lawsuit against Fox News, which Dominion claims defamed the voting machine company following the 2020 election.

abcnews.go.com

[...]

Jury selection is expected to last two days, with opening statements scheduled for Monday morning in Wilmington, Delaware.

To win its case, Dominion will have to meet the heavy burden of proving "actual malice" -- showing that Fox News did not just broadcast false statements, but that they did so knowing they were false or with a "reckless disregard" for the truth.

[...]

The closely-watched trial, which is expected to last five to six weeks, is expected to see live testimony in the courtroom from some of Fox's biggest stars and executives, including Fox Chairman Rupert Murdoch, and hosts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity.

"I never believed it," Murdoch said regarding one of the false anti-Dominion conspiracy theories, according to a transcript that was released from his closed-door deposition in the case earlier this year.

[...]

It would appear to be a slam dunk for Dominion to prove “actual malice.” I don’t see how Fox can make a defense.
JMO

 

[ilovewings]

It would appear to be a slam dunk for Dominion to prove “actual malice.” I don’t see how Fox can make a defense.
JMO

Ditto

 

[Cryptic]

It would appear to be a slam dunk for Dominion to prove “actual malice.” I don’t see how Fox can make a defense.
JMO

I have the opposite view.

The first amendment has been given a very, very broad interpretation in the United States.

In pursuit of this broad interpretation, news sources do not have to be objective, nor do they have to be fair in regards to public entities.

Slander can still occur, but malice against a public entity has been defined as knowing the accusations was false. This involves proving a "state of mind"- something very difficult to do.

Thinking that this ends in either an undisclosed settlement far, far less than 1.6 billion or a Supreme Court case.

If it goes to SCOTUS, the justices siding with FOX (well, not with FOX, but with a broad first amendment) maybe surprising.

 

[Cryptic]

For contrast, here is a defamation suit placed against CNN (265 million).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/07/media/cnn-settles-lawsuit-viral-video/index.html

CNN newsies selectively edited audio and video footage to make the High School Student appear to have been the aggressor- then presented a spun story they knew was effectively false.

CNN also continued to present one of the individuals involved as a "Vietnam combat veteran with an elite unit"- after records checks reveled that he was not.

But..... what makes this suit / settlement against CNN vastly different is that the High School student was a private individual. Dominion company is a public entity.

It makes a world of difference 1A wise.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

For contrast, here is a defamation suit placed against CNN (265 million).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/07/media/cnn-settles-lawsuit-viral-video/index.html

CNN newsies selectively edited audio and video footage to make the High School Student appear to have been the aggressor- then presented a spun story they knew was effectively false.

CNN also continued to present one of the individuals involved as a "Vietnam combat veteran with an elite unit"- after records checks reveled that he was not.

But..... what makes this suit / settlement against CNN vastly different is that the High School student was a private individual. Dominion company is a public entity.

It makes a world of difference 1A wise.

We don't know how much they settled for, it could have been for a nuisance amount. The number has not been released.

And in this case, there are documented statements showing Fox knew their reporting was false.

 

[SouthAussie]

Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said under oath that he believes the 2020 presidential election was free, fair and not stolen

“The election was not stolen”

Murdoch acknowledged that some of the network’s hosts — Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo, Jeanine Pirro and Sean Hannity — at times endorsed the false claims. He also said he didn’t stop the commentators from promoting the false claims from Trump allies that the election was stolen, even though he could have.

Fox chair Murdoch says 2020 election was fair: court filings

NEW YORK (AP) — Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said under oath that he believes the 2020 presidential election was free, fair and not stolen, according to court filings released Tuesday in a lawsuit over Fox News’ coverage of former President Donald Trump’s unfounded election fraud claims.

apnews.com

 

[FLmom777]

A big thanks to the Judge! If that trial is televised, I'd sure like to watch it. They call themselves a news network and then flat-out lie to the public and they knew it was all lies. Because they aren't just a cable channel and can be picked up over the Internet, I hope the FCC steps in and either smacks them with a huge fine or revokes their license altogether.

I can speak of lots of lies told by every other media as well. I hope you are as adamant about them.

 

[JerseyGirl]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/13/media/fox-news-dominion-trial-jury/index.html

Jury selection began Thursday. Almost the entire process took place outside of public view, with Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis privately questioning prospective jurors. Davis said Thursday afternoon that he made good progress, and that there were “more than enough jurors” to start the trial as planned on Monday, when opening statements are expected.

Jury selection is done for the week, and there are no in-court proceedings scheduled for Friday.

Roughly 300 potential jurors were summoned to the Delaware Superior Court and will eventually be whittled down to a panel of 12 jurors and 12 alternates. The high-stakes trial — which will put a spotlight on Fox’s 2020 election denialism and the role of disinformation in American politics — is expected to last about six weeks.

Potential jurors were peppered with questions about their news consumption habits, including whether they watch Fox News. But Judge Davis narrowed the scope of the questioning — he didn’t want jurors to be asked if they believe the 2020 election was legitimate, or if they had any connection to the January 6 insurrection.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I can speak of lots of lies told by every other media as well. I hope you are as adamant about them.

There is a difference between lies and mistakes. In this case, it looks very much like lies.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Davis told the attorneys Thursday afternoon that they had a sufficient pool of potential jurors to finalize selection and that the court would finish the process by allowing attorneys their strikes Monday before opening statements.

Delaware residents will decide outcome of Fox News defamation case. Trial to begin Monday

Twelve New Castle County residents will determine the outcome of what could be the country’s most high-profile First Amendment case in decades.

www.delawareonline.com

 

[Lilibet]

I can speak of lots of lies told by every other media as well. I hope you are as adamant about them.

There is a difference between lies and mistakes. In this case, it looks very much like lies.

Absolutely! And not to mention the fact that the Big Lie promoted on Fox that the election was stolen contributed to the violent insurrection on January 6…an attempt to harm or kill the VP and members of Congress and force a second term for Trump (who lost the election).

Playing the “whatabout game” under these circumstances is inappropriate. IMO.

 

[musicaljoke]

I can speak of lots of lies told by every other media as well. I hope you are as adamant about them.

The belief that lots of lies are told by other media has no bearing on this lawsuit. It's important to stay focused on the issue.

 

[SouthAussie]

Fox Corp.'s chief legal officer, Viet Dinh, acknowledged under oath that executives in the corporation's chain of command have an obligation "to prevent and correct known falsehoods."

Under oath, he [Rupert Murdoch] later said that he, Scott and Lachlan Murdoch held "a long talk" about "the direction Fox should take" that day in response to the falling ratings. They decided together to give play to Trump's baseless assertions.

Rupert Murdoch played an integral role in advising his two major U.S. newspapers — the New York Post and The Wall Street Journal — to editorialize against Trump's false claims.

Rupert Murdoch says Fox stars 'endorsed' lies about 2020. He chose not to stop them

 

[MyBelle]

I have the opposite view.

The first amendment has been given a very, very broad interpretation in the United States.

In pursuit of this broad interpretation, news sources do not have to be objective, nor do they have to be fair in regards to public entities.

Slander can still occur, but malice against a public entity has been defined as knowing the accusations was false. This involves proving a "state of mind"- something very difficult to do.

Thinking that this ends in either an undisclosed settlement far, far less than 1.6 billion or a Supreme Court case.

If it goes to SCOTUS, the justices siding with FOX (well, not with FOX, but with a broad first amendment) maybe surprising.

BBM. Truth is a complete defense to libel and in this case, there is proof Fox knew the statements were false and didn't retract them. There are ethical principles journalists/publishers must abide by and accuracy/truth is at the top of the list.

Now the Delaware state court has decisively ruled that the statements at issue in the case are false. Here’s what the judge wrote on the falsity question (in the only italicized and all-caps sentence in the entire 81-page opinion): “The evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that is CRYSTAL clear that none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true.”

Fox News’ Recent Setback Against Dominion Is a Major Victory for the First Amendment

A jury finding Fox News liable for defamation would be both a fair outcome and a victory for democracy and the First Amendment.

www.justsecurity.org

JMO

 

[branmuffin]

For contrast, here is a defamation suit placed against CNN (265 million).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/07/media/cnn-settles-lawsuit-viral-video/index.html

CNN newsies selectively edited audio and video footage to make the High School Student appear to have been the aggressor- then presented a spun story they knew was effectively false.

CNN also continued to present one of the individuals involved as a "Vietnam combat veteran with an elite unit"- after records checks reveled that he was not.

But..... what makes this suit / settlement against CNN vastly different is that the High School student was a private individual. Dominion company is a public entity.

It makes a world of difference 1A wise.

However, Nicholas Sandmann has lost several defamation suits against other media outlets. He filed suits against several other media outlets including the New York Times, ABC News, CBS News, and Rolling Stone magazine among others. Based on the judges interpretation of these particular suits suggests that Fox did knowingly impart false and malicious information to their audience. Here's a link:

'Covington kid' Nicholas Sandmann loses lawsuits against media outlets including NYT, ABC, and Rolling Stone

Nicholas Sandmann appeared in a viral video with a Native American elder in 2019.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[SouthAussie]

I have the opposite view.

The first amendment has been given a very, very broad interpretation in the United States.

In pursuit of this broad interpretation, news sources do not have to be objective, nor do they have to be fair in regards to public entities.

Slander can still occur, but malice against a public entity has been defined as knowing the accusations was false. This involves proving a "state of mind"- something very difficult to do.

Thinking that this ends in either an undisclosed settlement far, far less than 1.6 billion or a Supreme Court case.

If it goes to SCOTUS, the justices siding with FOX (well, not with FOX, but with a broad first amendment) maybe surprising.

There is a veteran (for 40 years) First Amendment lawyer, Lee Levine, who has defended media organisations in defamation cases who says:

“There appears to be a pretty good argument that Fox endorsed the accuracy of what was being said”
“I’d much rather be in Dominion’s shoes than Fox’s right now.”
Murdoch Acknowledges Fox News Hosts Endorsed Election Fraud Falsehoods


Lee Levine also said ... “I do overall believe that this is one of the strongest plaintiff’s cases that I’ve ever seen” “I have a hard time envisioning a scenario in which Fox wins before a jury”

Andrew Geronimo, director of the 1st Amendment Clinic at Case Western Reserve University School of Law:
“Usually, making out actual malice is all about inferences to things, what should have been discovered and what might have been overlooked” "“It’s not usually so stark as ‘this is BS.’ From a defense lawyer’s perspective, it gives me the cold sweats reading this”
How strong is Dominion’s defamation case against Fox News? Legal experts weigh in


Catherine Ross, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University who specializes in First Amendment issues:
“Fox does not appear to have any plausible defense, particularly in light of what Dominion uncovered in discovery of real-time knowledge of falsity”
Legal experts say Fox News on shaky legal ground in Dominion lawsuit

 

[Lilibet]

There is a veteran (for 40 years) First Amendment lawyer, Lee Levine, who has defended media organisations in defamation cases who says:

“There appears to be a pretty good argument that Fox endorsed the accuracy of what was being said”
“I’d much rather be in Dominion’s shoes than Fox’s right now.”
Murdoch Acknowledges Fox News Hosts Endorsed Election Fraud Falsehoods


Lee Levine also said ... “I do overall believe that this is one of the strongest plaintiff’s cases that I’ve ever seen” “I have a hard time envisioning a scenario in which Fox wins before a jury”

Andrew Geronimo, director of the 1st Amendment Clinic at Case Western Reserve University School of Law:
“Usually, making out actual malice is all about inferences to things, what should have been discovered and what might have been overlooked” "“It’s not usually so stark as ‘this is BS.’ From a defense lawyer’s perspective, it gives me the cold sweats reading this”
How strong is Dominion’s defamation case against Fox News? Legal experts weigh in


Catherine Ross, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University who specializes in First Amendment issues:
“Fox does not appear to have any plausible defense, particularly in light of what Dominion uncovered in discovery of real-time knowledge of falsity”
Legal experts say Fox News on shaky legal ground in Dominion lawsuit

I remember that Rick Wilson, the acerbic, Trump-hating, former Republican consultant and co-founder of The Lincoln Project titled his 2018 book “Everything Trump Touches Dies.” If these legal experts quoted above are correct, it looks as if Fox may end up being the largest “dead thing” at the top of the heap so far.
JMO

 

[JerseyGirl]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/13/media/fox-news-producer-lawsuit/index.html

In Grossberg's amended complaint filed this week, she accused Fox's lawyers of deleting messages from her phone. The lawsuit says Grossberg gave her phone to Fox lawyers in 2022, and "that certain messages between Ms. Grossberg and Ms. Bartiromo were missing/appeared to have been deleted" when she got the device back from Fox's team.

The topic of potentially missing or withheld evidence is looming large over the Dominion case. A judge sanctioned Fox on Wednesday for withholding key material from Dominion — audio recordings of Bartiromo talking off-air with Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell.

Suzanne Scott, the Fox News CEO, is expected to testify at the trial.

Emails made public in the Dominion case revealed that Scott said in 2020 it was "bad for business" for Fox News reporters to debunk Donald Trump's false assertions that the presidential election was rigged. (Fox News said these emails have been taken out of context by Dominion in its court filings.)

Scott was also on the receiving end of emails from Fox Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch, where he decried Trump's election denialism and blamed Trump for the January 6 insurrection.

 

[JerseyGirl]

See what Fox News tried to redact in the Dominion defamation case

Internal communications that the company wanted to keep from the public included hosts disparaging guests and acknowledging that election conspiracy theories were off base.

www.nbcnews.com

In a text message on Nov. 21, 2020, that Fox News tried to keep redacted, prime-time host Tucker Carlson indicated to Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis that he didn’t believe her claims about Dominion’s voting machines and thought they were “shockingly reckless.” Yet just two days later, Carlson was on air expressing concern about the “security of our electronic voting machines.”

“This is a real issue, no matter who raises it or who tries to dismiss it out of hand as a conspiracy theory,” he added.

In a Nov. 17, 2020, text message to an unknown individual, Carlson expressed his disdain for Trump lawyer Sidney Powell. He described her as a “psychopath,” a “crazy person” and a “f------ b----” who was “getting Trump all spun up and has zero evidence” about a stolen election. Fox News originally wanted all this information redacted.

Carlson did confront Powell privately, pushing her for more evidence for her theories, and he criticized her on air as well. Yet she continued to find a home on shows in the larger Fox family.

Fox News wanted to redact what host Jeanine Pirro’s executive producer thought of one of her monologues after the 2020 election: “This is completely crazy.”

Pirro was one of the Fox hosts who repeatedly pushed conspiracy theories about Dominion, even after it became clear — including by some people who worked at the network, according to internal messages — that there was no truth to them.

On Nov. 16, 2020, the team at the Fox Business show “Lou Dobbs Tonight” received an email from Ed Rollins, a contributor and GOP strategist who had run a pro-Trump super PAC. In that email, Rollins stated clearly that he believed Biden had won the election.

“I have seen or heard of no evidence of fraud,” Rollins wrote, in a message that Fox News tried to keep redacted. “The conspiracy theories put forth by Rudy and Sidney are all bulls---.”

Dobbs continued to push claims that electronic voting machines had contributed to a stolen election. In mid-December, however, he was forced to air a fact-checking segment that debunked many of his show’s on-air allegations.

Fox News wanted to redact a message from Tiffany Fazio, a top producer for Sean Hannity's prime-time show, saying that another host, Laura Ingraham, was skeptical of the allegations about Dominion Voting Systems because of their popularity on a site that pushed other conspiracy theories around QAnon.

"Laura is not touching dominion story bc it started on 8chan," Fazio wrote to Porter Berry, who oversaw digital content for Fox News.

On Nov. 12, 2020, Hannity sent a message to a group of producers and expressed his concern about a drop in ratings.

“The difference between Tuesday and Wednesday ratings is we had nothing new and less hard hitting imho,” he said in the message Fox News wanted to keep redacted.

He then followed up with a solution: “We need to own the dominion story.”