4 ms·

I mean I can't defend the general jist of what's said on CNN or Fox, but a lot of the time they say things or promote little things that don't matter but are mo

I mean I can't defend the general jist of what's said on CNN or Fox, but a lot of the time they say things or promote little things that don't matter but are most likely factually accurate enough to pass legal muster. I don't watch 24/7 so I know someone's going to respond with a Tucker Carlson quote that's like: "The Vaccine is killing people" and unfortunately, even for that, there's technically accurate data to back it up. I'm not saying that's RIGHT but I'm saying why Fox news is still on the air.

dragontamer 5y ago
People using lawyers to skirt the law will always happen. But the idea is that we __want__ people to do that. No one likes it when lawyers tell them "you can't legally do that", even when the lawyer is on their side. Fox News / CNN has a team of lawyers whose job is simply: making sure what they air is legal. All news teams have this, to varying effects. (Maybe not fact checking every article ever written, but at a minimum, lawyers provide advice and review every now and then). ------ In any case, Fox News / CNN will not ever say anything blatantly slanderous / libelous. Its why they word things in certain ways. They could have footage of X literally shooting Y in the face, and they'll describe it as "Alleged suspect X allegedly shot Y in the face". That's a result of this "lawyer training". They're wording their articles so that suspect X won't be able to sue them for libel / slander. You won't find any such weasel words in any social media post.
- voakbasda 5y ago
  With enough weasel words, you can say almost anything. Those words degrade a potential statement of fact to that of a mere opinion, and you are free to share your opinions everywhere and with anyone. Legally speaking.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    Yeah, but at least we get Tucker Carlson's lawyer telling us that Tucker Carlson's words are non-factual. We get to see who the real clowns are eventually. You can also see how FoxNews (and other media) are reacting to the libel / slander claims of Dominion Voting (the makers of the vote machines that Fox News claims were insecure). That's a factual claim and directly damages Dominion Voting's business. Fox News overreached severely, and are now backpedaling and cooperating with Dominion Voting's lawyers (https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-media-lawsuits-elections-912eea8e168f95d51dec02da78ac2760 https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-media-laws...). We've got concession articles and "takebacks" from Fox. Its not perfect, but the legal system does in fact have emergency stopgap measures to pull a media company back from the brink. ------- You won't even get that far on social media. You can't even pass step 1 of the suing process: naming the person to sue.
- coding123 5y ago
  Absolutely. Every detail is thought out on these networks. They only get in hot water when someone goes off-script and even for that stuff there's typically some kind of correction issued later. It's all about covering their butts.

dragontamer 5y ago

People using lawyers to skirt the law will always happen. But the idea is that we __want__ people to do that. No one likes it when lawyers tell them "you can't legally do that", even when the lawyer is on their side. Fox News / CNN has a team of lawyers whose job is simply: making sure what they air is legal. All news teams have this, to varying effects. (Maybe not fact checking every article ever written, but at a minimum, lawyers provide advice and review every now and then). ------ In any case, Fox News / CNN will not ever say anything blatantly slanderous / libelous. Its why they word things in certain ways. They could have footage of X literally shooting Y in the face, and they'll describe it as "Alleged suspect X allegedly shot Y in the face". That's a result of this "lawyer training". They're wording their articles so that suspect X won't be able to sue them for libel / slander. You won't find any such weasel words in any social media post.

voakbasda 5y ago
With enough weasel words, you can say almost anything. Those words degrade a potential statement of fact to that of a mere opinion, and you are free to share your opinions everywhere and with anyone. Legally speaking.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  Yeah, but at least we get Tucker Carlson's lawyer telling us that Tucker Carlson's words are non-factual. We get to see who the real clowns are eventually. You can also see how FoxNews (and other media) are reacting to the libel / slander claims of Dominion Voting (the makers of the vote machines that Fox News claims were insecure). That's a factual claim and directly damages Dominion Voting's business. Fox News overreached severely, and are now backpedaling and cooperating with Dominion Voting's lawyers (https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-media-lawsuits-elections-912eea8e168f95d51dec02da78ac2760 https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-media-laws...). We've got concession articles and "takebacks" from Fox. Its not perfect, but the legal system does in fact have emergency stopgap measures to pull a media company back from the brink. ------- You won't even get that far on social media. You can't even pass step 1 of the suing process: naming the person to sue.
coding123 5y ago
Absolutely. Every detail is thought out on these networks. They only get in hot water when someone goes off-script and even for that stuff there's typically some kind of correction issued later. It's all about covering their butts.