Fox News gets okay to misinform public.

Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.

Quote:

The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, successfully argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves. >>>>>>>> The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves. In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation. Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the verdict.

That is "Fair and Balanced".........

Ken, I am truly impressed with your ability to find the latest liberal talking point and spam the board with it (4 times now by my count).


Now, if anyone would like to read a much less biased report on the entire event:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbgh/akrewins.cfm
Of note to me in that article:

Quote:

... What The Jury Decided "Do you find that the plaintiff Jane Akre has proven by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant New World Communications of Tampa through its employees or agents terminated her employment or took other retaliatory personnel action against her because she opposed or refused to participate in the broadcast of a false, distorted or slanted news report which she reasonable believed would violate the prohibition against intentional falsification or distortion of the news on television if it were aired?" The jury verdict as to question one: No. The courtroom remained tense as the clerk went on to read question number 2: "Do you find that the plaintiff Jane Akre has proven, by the greater weight of the evidence, that the defendant, through its employees or agents, terminated her employment or took other retaliatory personnel action against her because she threatened to disclose to the Federal Communications Commission under oath, in writing, the broadcast of a false, distorted, or slanted news report which she reasonably believed would violate the prohibition against intentional falsification or distortion of the news on television, if it were aired?" The jury verdict as to question 2: Yes. ...

Now, given that result, how would you appeal? The only thing I can think of is what New World Communications of Tampa came up with - prove that her threat was not an actual threat, because even if they did distort something, there was no crime committed.

I'd also like to note several other things here:
1) No one proved that Fox News lied. That wasn't even part of the trial.
2) No one even proved they were forced to lie
3) The case was against WTVT, a Fox affiliate, not the Fox News Station.