Money talks. Maybe this is how we finally take this fascist propaganda off the air.

Apr 12, 2023 1:35 PM

Illinifan88

Views

89049

Likes

1100

Dislikes

15

https://www.nbcnews.com/media/rupert-murdoch-fox-corp-board-members-sued-investor-stolen-election-cl-rcna79267

This is pretty ironic when the Imgur front page has been almost exclusively political propaganda for a year or more

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 24

Amazing, if the board can sue due to dividends lost because of defamation suit, then they an also sue because of dividends lost by this new suit, making a continuous loop of lawsuits.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Now watch other shareholders jump on the bandwagon before the Dominion case is over. MAybe it will be enough to bring the Murdochs and their cronies down along with all those fucking assholes at Faux Newz!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

they can fuck with the ppl, but fuck with a shareholder and their investment in them, yeah thats a different ballgame

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Please put Murdoch out of business. The world has had enough of the lies and hate thinly disguised as “news”

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

RM is a smug looking motherfucker

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Watch them pull the "no reasonable person would believe Tucker Carlson" defense again.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Who is Robert Schwartz, the plaintiff? Does he have money behind him?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The US HAD regulations that kept news programs basically honest until the 1980s Reagan era GOP repealed those "for some reason"!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They fucked around for years and years - I hope they find out for decades to come

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

That's a picture if Murdock 10 years ago. He doesn't have decades to give.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bet the Board is afraid they'll lose,

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Money is how you take down powerful people, from Al Capone, to Trump, to Fox News.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It's really a damn shame we have to rely on big corporations to bail out democracy via lawsuits against other big corporations.

3 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 0

It’s a single investor. But Dominion did what others could not. Trial next week.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

It’s actually been a deliberate conservative project for decades. Step 1: “We don’t need the government regulating this. Allow people to sue and the market will regulate itself.” Step 2: “Lawsuits are out of control! We need to limit the ability of people to sue, or the free market can’t function.l

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

See: Exxon Valdez, Monsanto, McDonald’s coffee incident, etc.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

This meme text and the links are mixing up two different lawsuits. Dominion is not the shareholder suing. The single shareholder is Robert Schwarz.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That's how the NBC story starts. I agree it's a little unclear, but the whole story is linked.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Thanks for clarifying.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh, this stuff is delightful.

3 years ago | Likes 154 Dislikes 0

nicely worded. that allows discovery data about -all- of the election conspiracies and e-mails/texts about same. not just dominion focused.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Keeping fingers crossed - Single Plaintiff So Far!

3 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 0

May the Schwarz be with him!

3 years ago | Likes 49 Dislikes 0

Given that the corporation has been making big bucks by telling lies so far (which the investors could, and should, have known), and the Dominion lawsuit is pretty much the first sign ever that that business model may not be sustainable (and only if Dominion wins), I wonder if that shareholder lawsuit has any chance of succeeding. I hope it does, of course, but...

3 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

For what it's worth, all the news I hear about the case sounds like it's going Dominion's way so far. For example, early this morning I saw a thing saying that Fox couldn't fall back on the defense of "We were only airing the conspiracy theories because they were newsworthy." As much as I share your trepidation of the U.S. legal system and worry about how the rich and corporations always wiggle out of consequences, so far this seems to be going well.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

As well as Dominion, Smartmatics is suing its just their case isn't as far along. But they are a much bigger company in America so they will be able to ask for MORE damages.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

There is no way dominion is losing. They literally have everything. Conversations that Fox knowingly did it, knew it was wrong, for the sake of monetary gain. They have so much evidence that it didn’t really need to go to trial by jury cause there is nothing left to deliberate on.

3 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

They really shouldn't be losing, but as an outsider looking in, I'd trust the US judiciary system as far as I can throw it. For the derivative action, the suing side would probably have to show Fox could have known these lies would have cost shareholders more money than it'd make them, though.

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

There's no doubt that Fox lied knowingly -- that part has been settled. What remains (aiui) is whether or not it rose to the level of defamation.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Easily it does. They malicious told lies for the fear of losing their viewers which would lead to lower stock prices. Also recently they just found fox was hiding more information during discovery and are ordered to turn that shit over.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I totally agree. The point is that's all that Dominion has to show in court -- the lying has already been proven. I don't doubt they did suffer, but they still have to convince a jury of it. Shouldn't be hard, especially after finding fox was still hiding stuff, but they gotta do it. But the judge already ruled on the lying part -- they done did it.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If you call yourself news, you better be able to back up your stories with evidence

3 years ago | Likes 273 Dislikes 1

Pretty sure they argue that they're actually entertainment, pretty much for this reason

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hell, even without evidence of what you're saying, it is really hard to sue for defamation with actual malice. There's a lot of plausible deniability in just saying We were reporting what was being said. Only surefire way to get that kind of case to win is if the defendant is dumb enough to put it in writing that "we know this is a lie, but we're going to keep saying it anyway" And no one is that dumb. Right? RIGHT? Lol. Lfmao. Haha. What a bunch of fucking clowns.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unfortunately, even a 2billion dollar judgement is just a slap on the wrist. Murdoch has >17billion. He'll bankrupt FoxNews and reincorporate under a new name (FoxNews2.0) and continue bullshit. Anything short of serious jailtime is just a fine. Cost of doing business. [[sidenote: if you advance each letter of FoxNews by one {consonant/vowel}, you get GuyPixt. I don't know what to do with this realization]]

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well, that should be the case but you can thank Reagan for why it’s not

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They won suppression of discussing Jan 6th at the trial. But I have to wonder. If a link can be established, will individual capitol police officers (among others) have grounds to sue them for their injuries? There's also the implications of the old anti-KKK laws for voter intimidation

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This doesn’t really ring true though does it. When accountability for telling blatant lies that lead to an insurrection, lies that by the way, they’re still telling to this day, aren’t enforced, why bother to fact check or back anything up? Fox News spread hate and misinformation daily and get away with it because they say it’s all “opinions” and that they’re allowed to have those.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Well said!

1 year ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It’s ok because no reasonable person would mistake them for news

3 years ago | Likes 56 Dislikes 1

yep, all those kids that end up seeing it are reasonable people too

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Its not ok because their viewers are not reasonable people.

3 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 2

They're referring to a defense posed by Fox in a previous lawsuit... and they won...

3 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 0

Its such a bullshit answer, because they still put the Fox News logo on the screen its false advertising at best. Should have been required to put a huge banner above the segments “this is the opinion of the presenter and in no way represents the views of the network” just like every news paper has to do with opinion pieces. If you don’t put a disclaimer you are legally responsible for what you produce.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They are, but MSNBC has used the same defense. It's terrible, and also pretty standard for talking head opinion shows masquerading as news

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Source on that?

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yea, but their viewers still arent reasonable ppl

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 2

That's... that's the point...

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1