Matt BlazeApr 19, 2023

Fox having to pay a substantial damages settlement to Dominion is a just outcome; their amplification of lies about malicious backdoors and rigged elections was contemptible and dangerous.

But we shouldn't conclude from this that US voting systems are perfectly or even adequately protected against attack. While great progress has been made, there's still a great deal of work left to do to make our elections truly secure and robust.

Show threadMatt BlazeApr 19, 2023
The best thing that Dominion could do with their infusion of cash from Fox - for both their reputation and for the good of democracy - would be to invest it into developing more robust, auditable election technology, such as optical scan systems with features to facilitate Risk-Limiting Audits.
Show threadMatt BlazeApr 19, 2023
I share people’s disappointment that there wasn’t a public trial. Fox did real damage to the country, and we deserve a reckoning. But the harm Fox (et al) did to the country wasn’t the issue in this suit. It was just about damage to Dominion. So any vindication we’d get about the harm done to the country would just have been a side effect of the trial, not the goal.
Show threadMatt BlazeApr 19, 2023

Fox has paid a price, in both cash and reputational harm. The case didn’t give us the dramatic public trial that might have been, but at least there was a great deal of deposition testimony and other discovery material put on the record. That’s ultimately a win for society, even if it was less dramatic and satisfying than we might have hoped.

And more cases are still in process.

Show threadMatt BlazeApr 22, 2023

Also, while the settlement amount was about half of the $1.6B that Dominion asked for, it was by no means assured that that's what a jury would have actually awarded, or that a large award wouldn't be reduced by the judge or on appeal.

The damages aspects of the case were complicated, and would likely have involved fairly involved expert testimony by economists, with reasonable arguments for both large and small numbers.

Taking the $787 million was probably a very rational decision.

Show threadDR_murfApr 22, 2023
@mattblaze i think it was lame to settle. sure fox had to state they did wrong but they watered it down and played it when nobody, who believed that the election was stolen, even watched it so will never acknowledge it. either that or they should’ve stipulated how the public statement should’ve been made. this is a disservice to the american population and i’m hoping the next case does better
Show threadJarrod Frates

@DR_murf @mattblaze Fox has not stated to date that they were wrong. They have not admitted to anything, and they probably won't have to. They acknowledged the judge's ruling, but acknowledging it doesn't mean anything. On the other hand, it looks like the settlement itself may end up being public, rather than the normal NDA that happens around these things.

Damage awards are generally limited to single-digit multipliers (State Farm v. Campbell, 2004). Dominion was facing an uphill battle to get even tens of millions in damages, and that's *if* they won, and it probably would have been dragged out in court for years. Legal bills could have consumed most or even all of any eventual award. They took the rational decision.

The next case against Fox is perhaps Smartmatic. They have even less damages That will probably go away in a settlement, too, and an even smaller one.

Apr 22, 2023 at 1:17amWeb
Show threadJarrod FratesApr 22, 2023

@DR_murf @mattblaze

All that said, changes may still happen. Dan Bongino has already been released, ostensibly over contract negotiations, but he was one of the most extreme election deniers on Fox News and it happened days after the settlement with no forewarning. Fox News also edited a Trump interview recently, slicing out an election fraud claim, suggesting programming changes underway. Tucker isn't leaving, but others might. We'll have to wait and see.