Fox News viewers still don’t know the truth about Trump’s big election lie, nor about the network’s role in promoting that lie.
If Dominion wins its case against Fox News, perhaps the court should order the network to finally tell viewers the truth? https://robertreich.substack.com/p/the-perfect-punishment-for-fox-news
@birdpoof @rbreich a settlement can have any terms that the parties mutually agree upon.
I imagine Dominion have asked for public apologies to be a condition of any settlement, which is why Fox hasn't settled. I assume Fox wants a monetary-only judgement (at nearly any price) that means they can continue business as usual.
@rbreich Those on Truth Social do.
The many people there who do not support the former president, make sure to mention it on every Hannity "truth" that he posts.
They are Truth Trolls.
@rbreich it wouldn't matter. Fox news viewers wouldn't believe it because it wouldn't match their pre-established prejudices. They'd dismiss it as a court-mandated falsehood.
You're talking about people who look at Trump as an innocent man, even a godly man. Even as he's being charged over hush money payments to a porn star he cheated with when his wife had just given birth to their child. Even after he said this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/01/19/ill-give-her-a-week-to-lose-the-baby-weight-trump-said-of-melania-months-before-alleged-tryst-with-porn-star/
@rbreich that would be nice but I don't think it's possible because compelled speech and a-priori restrictions on speech (future lies) aren't remedies the US courts are interested in, because 1A.
You could have a settlement agreement with those features but a judgement is IMHO going to be just monetary, based on damages to Dominion.
The public does not have standing and there doesn't seem to be a legal theory of how they're materially damaged by defamation.
@rbreich don't look for justice from the legal system.
The only way I think this changes is when you get some legislation that gives the public standing to request damages from the court arising from misleading behaviour. I'm not sure that would stand even an impartial review against 1A and the current SCOTUS would bin it in a flash.
Hey @Popehat how do you fix systematic lying in the public sphere in a way that's constitutional? RICO? ;)
Twoifby
Robert Reich
birdpoof
William
Serion
Mathias
शिवदम् Ⓥ
joe•iuculano 
Cormac
BoneHouseWasps🔶🇬🇧🇪🇺
SFborn1940