Adam KlasfeldApr 19, 2023

Three prominent First Amendment lawyers uniformly agreed that Fox’s $787.5 million deal was record-setting, massive, and would be too painful for the network to ignore.

It's more than half of Fox's earnings from 2022.

Why they say you shouldn't believe the naysayers. https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/dont-get-it-twisted-foxs-787-5m-defamation-deal-is-record-setting-massive-and-painful-experts-say/

Don't get it twisted: Fox's $787.5M defamation deal is record-setting, massive and painful, experts say

Three prominent First Amendment lawyers tell Law&Crime that Fox's settlement was record-setting, massive, and would be too painful for the network to ignore.

Law & Crime
Show threadDeterioratedStuccoApr 19, 2023
@KlasfeldReports
Earnings, not profits? Oww. That's gotta hurt.
Show threadbunnyAdvocateApr 19, 2023
@SoftwareTheron @KlasfeldReports That's a typo/error, as Fox Corp's revenue is approx ~$4 billion per quarter. The settlement was half of Fox's 2022 not revenue (profit), not earnings.
Show threadAdam Klasfeld
@SoftwareTheron @bunnyAdvocate earnings is synonymous with profit, ie, what you net. Revenue is before you account for expenses. (See the chart inside the story, where “revenue” is a far higher figure.)
Apr 19, 2023 at 10:46pmWeb
Show threadDeterioratedStuccoApr 19, 2023
@KlasfeldReports @bunnyAdvocate
Okay, thank you.
Show threadRob NapierApr 22, 2023

@KlasfeldReports @SoftwareTheron @bunnyAdvocate Unfortunately the article is misleading about this, because of the quote "Imagine if someone came up to you and said that all of that money that you earned last year, we’re going to take half of it." That's not the same thing. Most people are going to think "my salary" not "my salary minus all my expenses" when you quote that.

But I don't see how this changes anything more than "don't explicitly name entities who have enough money to sue us."