come on!
When you’ve been insulted and libeled, sueing is not an attack on free press!
…and the comparison with Charlie Hebdo is totally irrelevant. No one is talking about killing anyone from fox news!
7 Likes
The Reagan Era removal of the fairness doctrine, just removed the requirement for broadcasters to give equal time to both sides of contentious issues. There IS no side to many of the “stories” Fox airs. Death panels, birth certificates, sharia zones, frequent use of careful editing to cause public figures actual statements to be taken out of context - these are essentially purposeful lies. Which throws them into the realm of libel, which is legally actionable in the US, though public figures have to prove actual malice, which is a high bar.
8 Likes
So French libel law allows the government to sue? Not some Parisian official who claims he or she has been libeled, but the city of Paris itself?
Thank FSM for the SPEECH Act. It shouldn’t be that difficult for Fox News to make itself judgment-proof in France, even if it’s a subsidiary of a company with assets there. If I were their lawyer, I’d advise them to default.
This is cruel! The mentally disabled should not be allowed to fight in court for our amusement!
Both “being FOX NEWS” and “trying to outlaw Stupid Speech” count as criteria for mental disability, yeah?
Next up: Bobby Jendal is keeping the “No Go Zones” meem alive, in his attempt to be relevant to Republican activists in his bid to run for President in 201
1 Like
I don’t know, I can see lots of good arguments in favor of laws preventing the news media from knowingly lying to whip up fear of the new boogie man. And imagine if they had said the same kind of thing about Jewish people for example, they’d be through the legal wringer in a lot more places than just France.
And personally I’d like to say thank you to France for a breath of sanity in the face of something we in America have all become a little resigned to.
4 Likes
It’s not going to happen. Boing Boing may be progressive in a way, but it is unwavering in its Chauvinism. We are lucky if it is acknowledged that continental Europeans even have their own values and aren’t just bad at being American progressives.
8 Likes
“We can’t decide who’s dumber.”
I’ll go with FOX News for a $1000, Alex.
10 Likes
"Congratulations, Mayor Hidalgo, just weeks after the Charlie Hebdo
massacre you managed to become a globally-celebrated foe of the free
press."
I disagree here - taking someone to court for defamation or libel is an important and integral mechanism OF free press. When the press goes off the rail and reports as fact completely not-fact-checked bullshit that harms someone, the counterbalance and proper response is to seek remedy.
This does not chill free speech and press. This bolsters it by giving disincentives for shoddy journalism that damages not only the damaged party but the credibility of journalism overall.
Let’s not confuse a terrorist act with the civilized mechanisms operating WITHIN the bounds of societal rules to remedy damage done within a realm where free speech and free press can flourish. Suing an automaker because their poor design led to unnecessary deaths does not make one an opponent of innovation and free market. This is the same thing - the only thing that ought to be discouraged is libel, not free press.
9 Likes
Xeni I respect you for many other articles ;
But beeing a journalist, you should understand the difference between saying stupidities, and deliberatelly lying on a subject, on a way to achieve a political process, in this case afraiding people to obtain their vote for the most conservative party.
This process is used also in France by the extreme-right party, and so it was by president Sarkozy.
After the attentats, we have a small counterfire and a small hope with the “je suis charlie” manifestations who said " hey, we don’t make amalgam, muslim does not mean terrorist, we love free speech, but not lies, we respect each others, with differences, and we can laugh about what we want, even religions, but not make apology of terrorism, not lie about someone, etc
what fox do is propagande, not stupidity, not journalism, and had to be condamned.
9 Likes
Well I don’t know anything about French Law but is it possible they can sue Fox in France, get a judgement and take demand money from Murdoch directly or basically block all sorts of business in the EU until that money was paid? I do know other European legal systems so I’m betting yeah.
If Fox loses a suit to France they will pay money ( assuming of course the decision is for an amount that they can pay) they are a little bit too international to not do it.
Also this post was a little bit heavy on the jingoism.
3 Likes
yeah probably the mayor of Paris, which is sort of like being the Mayor of New York if New York was also the capital of the U.S, knows if it is actually possible to sue on these grounds in her country.
That would be Fox.
The term doesn’t apply. Streisand Effect is when the person is trying to cover up something. Fox made up some slanderous shit, they /should/ be sued.
The press has the freedome to completely make stuff up, and not be held accountable? Huh. Here and I thought that libel and slander laws actually applied to them. Silly me.
13 Likes
Given Fox’s multinational operations(or at least those of their related companies, not sure if there are many international markets for Faux News with American characteristics), there probably is something that they can go after.
As for the jingoism, that’s a bit strong. My taste for aggressive foreign policy usually ranks between “This has to be the dumbest way to get what we want.” and “Wow, a clusterfuck and an atrocity, USA!”.
If you were using the term more generally, though, I’d say guilty as charged and proud of it. The US has some severely questionable ideas, and even more dubious implementations of good ideas; but I have no problem saying that the US position on freedom of speech is, in fact, better. One of our best, and exceptionally good by global standards. We don’t always follow through on it as thoroughly as we should(eg. US freedom of press, empirically measured, and Content Cartels vs. everyone else); but
1 Like
The First Amendment is there to ensure that a corrupt government cannot hide it’s actions from the people by suppressing the press. ANY attempt to use it, in any manner, to promote falsehoods is unforgivable.
2 Likes
Not sure if being satirical, or just stupid.
2 Likes
To all you “RUHAH MURRICA FWEEDOM!” posters.
We Europeans, well the northern/west part in any case, draw the line at two points.
1: call for aggression and/or racism.
2: slander and/or creating reputation damage based on false statements.
It really bugs me that you impose your sense of morale and liberty on other democracies, like you invented it.
Expected more out of boingboing.
It didn’t really help that you (one of your big-shots) where a no-show at the march in Paris either.
3 Likes
Probably not, I’m fairly sure they budget for these sorts of things already.
Abe Foxman of the ADL would write an angry letter and the rest of us would just shrug our shoulders. Slander us all you want, were used to it by now.
While I agree with you in principle, Americans hardly have a monopoly on cultural imperialism.
You probably shouldn’t…
“trying to outlaw Stupid Speech” count as criteria for mental disability, yeah?
Your characterization of something you disagree with as a sign of mental illness really degrades the actually ill, and it’ s also coated in weaksauce from a debating standpoint.
But mostly just sounds like elitist rhetoric and hot air, signifying nothing. Would you call FOX ‘gay’? Have you done any better here?
1 Like
Uh… friend. This story is France using French legal definitions to try to limit an American company.
Usually when people get things as backwards as you did there, it’s propaganda. Or FOX news.
1 Like
