So if Fox News isn’t really a news organization, where’s the lawsuit to shut them down for falsely advertising themselves?
The fact is, the Democrats—and every other critic—know they can’t legally do that, because even tabloids and entertainment shows have the right to report on real events.
Court statements like “no rational person would reasonably believe…” are legal jargon used to dodge liability in lawsuits—it doesn’t suddenly strip them of being a news organization.
If the content’s purely entertainment, then let’s see someone challenge their status. Until that happens, it’s all noise without substance, comrade.
where’s the lawsuit to shut them down for falsely advertising themselves?
Conservatives (under Reagan) abolished the “Fairness Doctrine” that would allow such lawsuits to succeed. Reagan also vetoed a congressional attempt to codify (legally require) “news” organizations to operate in good faith and honesty.
Very shortly after these changes by conservatives, AM radio and Fox News burst to life filling the airwaves with right-wing misinformation designed to make conservative morons angry at scapegoats.
TL;DR:
Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation.
Ok, so it’s legal to call them “news” then. If it weren’t they wouldn’t be called “Fox News.”
Dude, they’re a news org. I know you hate them. I understand. That’s ok. But they are still news, even if you hate them. There is no law against them or anyone calling them and treating them like a news org. That’s why they are still around.
I’m not even conservative or voting conservative, and I can see that. Just accept it, friend.
Explain how I’m arguing in bad faith? We weren’t talking about “honesty” we were talking legal stuff. And you brought up legal stuff. Everything I said was true.
Basically what you mean is that YOU don’t think they should be called a news org. And that YOU think it’s dishonest to say.
It doesn’t count as bad faith just because you disagree with it, friend. :)
Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation. Every word.
You are attempting to defend a tabloid as a reasonable source of true information by pretending that a lack of legal remedy for lies justifies their admitted dishonesty. As such, your bad faith position is apparent on its face.
As always, every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation.
You’re mad because Fox News is still a thing. And you don’t think it should be.
Just fucking admit it, dude. Stop trying to hide behind “oh you are arguing in bad faith!” or “You’re defending a tabloid!!”
Dude you hate Fox News. You hate conservatives. You hate the election is going to be close, so you feel that Fox News is adding to the danger of your candidate not winning.
Just fucking have the balls to say it. It’s not even something to be worried about because most of Lemmy feels the same way you do! lol
Stop being a pussy and hiding behind “bad faith!” accusations. Fucking just come out and be upfront about it.
And you’re arguing with me and I’m not even a conservative or voting for Trump! lololol Feel free to block me and/or this community if you are gonna just make up shit about bad faith. :)
I’m not angry. I just think it’s funny that you’re such a pussy you can’t even admit what you really feel. Everyone on Lemmy hates me. But I don’t care and you don’t see me being gentle and careful about it. :)
But you’re acting like a fucking pussy who is afraid to say something wrong.
It’s almost like every word uttered by you is deception or manipulation.
So stop being a pussy. Say what you think. I don’t give a fuck because I’m voting socialist. I’ll laugh at you if Harris wins, cuz you deserve it. I’ll laugh at you if Trump wins, cuz you deserve it. :)
They are literally not news, at least according to the case where exactly that was litigated, BUT they are legally allowed to lie about that, insofar as calling themselves “news” is concerned. There’s a vast difference.
Wanna know who does not disagree with me? The judge who ruled on this question in a case against Fox News. Wanna know why she came to that conclusion?`Because, and get this, because FOX NEWS themselves argued as follows:
Fox News seeks dismissal at the pleading stage on two constitutional grounds. First, it asserts that Mr. Carlson’s statements on the December 10, 2018, episode of his show are constitutionally protected opinion commentary on matters of public importance and are not reasonably understood as being factual.
As Defendant notes, Mr. Carlson himself aims to “challenge[] political correctness and media bias.” Def. Br. at 14. This “general tenor” of the show should then inform a viewer that he is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in “exaggeration” and “non-literal commentary.”
[…]
Fox persuasively argues, see Def Br. at 13-15, that given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer “arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism” about the statements he makes.
(emphasis in bold by me)
So Fox News claim they are not news, but commentary talk shows. Again: Fox News themselves agree with me when I say Fox News is not news and according to Fox News themselves, they cannot be reasonably understood as being factual.
Ah, I see. Like I’m referring to my old bicycle as “my Harley” even though I know it isn’t one, it does not legally fulfill any of the criteria to legally count as a motorcycle, and nobody in their right mind would take me seriously when I say that, but it’s my little in-joke that I’m calling it that on the web. Got it.
Cool story. Haven’t changed my mind. Lots of people disagree with you, they are called Fox News, and regardless of what you think, I’ll keep posting. If you don’t like, you can leave, block me, and/or block this community! Thanks, comrade!
So if Fox News isn’t really a news organization, where’s the lawsuit to shut them down for falsely advertising themselves?
The fact is, the Democrats—and every other critic—know they can’t legally do that, because even tabloids and entertainment shows have the right to report on real events.
Court statements like “no rational person would reasonably believe…” are legal jargon used to dodge liability in lawsuits—it doesn’t suddenly strip them of being a news organization.
If the content’s purely entertainment, then let’s see someone challenge their status. Until that happens, it’s all noise without substance, comrade.
Conservatives (under Reagan) abolished the “Fairness Doctrine” that would allow such lawsuits to succeed. Reagan also vetoed a congressional attempt to codify (legally require) “news” organizations to operate in good faith and honesty.
Very shortly after these changes by conservatives, AM radio and Fox News burst to life filling the airwaves with right-wing misinformation designed to make conservative morons angry at scapegoats.
TL;DR: Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation.
Ok, so it’s legal to call them “news” then. If it weren’t they wouldn’t be called “Fox News.”
Dude, they’re a news org. I know you hate them. I understand. That’s ok. But they are still news, even if you hate them. There is no law against them or anyone calling them and treating them like a news org. That’s why they are still around.
I’m not even conservative or voting conservative, and I can see that. Just accept it, friend.
Legal does not equal Honest
You are arguing in bad faith, as usual. Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation. Every word.
Explain how I’m arguing in bad faith? We weren’t talking about “honesty” we were talking legal stuff. And you brought up legal stuff. Everything I said was true.
Basically what you mean is that YOU don’t think they should be called a news org. And that YOU think it’s dishonest to say.
It doesn’t count as bad faith just because you disagree with it, friend. :)
Cool! I’m not a conservative, so I don’t care.
You are attempting to defend a tabloid as a reasonable source of true information by pretending that a lack of legal remedy for lies justifies their admitted dishonesty. As such, your bad faith position is apparent on its face.
As always, every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation.
No, try again.
You’re mad because Fox News is still a thing. And you don’t think it should be.
Just fucking admit it, dude. Stop trying to hide behind “oh you are arguing in bad faith!” or “You’re defending a tabloid!!”
Dude you hate Fox News. You hate conservatives. You hate the election is going to be close, so you feel that Fox News is adding to the danger of your candidate not winning.
Just fucking have the balls to say it. It’s not even something to be worried about because most of Lemmy feels the same way you do! lol
Stop being a pussy and hiding behind “bad faith!” accusations. Fucking just come out and be upfront about it.
And you’re arguing with me and I’m not even a conservative or voting for Trump! lololol Feel free to block me and/or this community if you are gonna just make up shit about bad faith. :)
Even your emote after your angry, accusatory rant seems dishonest.
It’s almost like every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation. Even the emotes.
I’m not angry. I just think it’s funny that you’re such a pussy you can’t even admit what you really feel. Everyone on Lemmy hates me. But I don’t care and you don’t see me being gentle and careful about it. :)
But you’re acting like a fucking pussy who is afraid to say something wrong.
It’s almost like every word uttered by you is deception or manipulation.
So stop being a pussy. Say what you think. I don’t give a fuck because I’m voting socialist. I’ll laugh at you if Harris wins, cuz you deserve it. I’ll laugh at you if Trump wins, cuz you deserve it. :)
They are literally not news, at least according to the case where exactly that was litigated, BUT they are legally allowed to lie about that, insofar as calling themselves “news” is concerned. There’s a vast difference.
Well, lots of people disagree with you. Including me. Thanks!
Wanna know who does not disagree with me? The judge who ruled on this question in a case against Fox News. Wanna know why she came to that conclusion?`Because, and get this, because FOX NEWS themselves argued as follows:
(emphasis in bold by me)
So Fox News claim they are not news, but commentary talk shows. Again: Fox News themselves agree with me when I say Fox News is not news and according to Fox News themselves, they cannot be reasonably understood as being factual.
Fox News disagrees with you.
I don’t care. They are referred to as a news org, even in wikipedia. So I’ll keep using them. Thanks!
Ah, I see. Like I’m referring to my old bicycle as “my Harley” even though I know it isn’t one, it does not legally fulfill any of the criteria to legally count as a motorcycle, and nobody in their right mind would take me seriously when I say that, but it’s my little in-joke that I’m calling it that on the web. Got it.
Cool story. Haven’t changed my mind. Lots of people disagree with you, they are called Fox News, and regardless of what you think, I’ll keep posting. If you don’t like, you can leave, block me, and/or block this community! Thanks, comrade!