4 ms·
They won't, but wouldn't anyway. A civil suit can recover damages, it can't make Fox into something other than what it is. But no one who would have been rece
by ajross 4y ago
They won't, but wouldn't anyway. A civil suit can recover damages, it can't make Fox into something other than what it is.
But no one who would have been receptive to the truth is watching Fox in the first place. That is, really, the core truth exposed by this suit. Fox is completely captured by its audience. For years we thought it was the other way around.
- ortusdux 4y agoA settlement can contain just about anything. For example, it could require Fox to air an MSNBC produced 1 hour primetime special about the whole affair.
- ajross 4y agoContracts can constrain or direct speech in specific ways. So sure, you could put that one special in a settlement. There are severe first amendment problems when you try to do something more vague, like "You have to report on unflattering stories about Fox itself", which I took to be the upthread point.
- dragonwriter 4y agoYes, but why would Fox “settle” for something harmful to their business that Dominion could not, in the worst case, win in court? A settlement might contain something that wouldn’t be on the table in a court judgement if the value it adds to the side that gets it is disproportional to the cost to the side providing it — so that it is win-win compared to a compromise within the scope of potential court outcomes — but this is the opposite, less valuable to Dominion and more harmful to Fox than money.