All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Dalak]

There's the Dominion and Smartmatic voting machine companies defamation lawsuit against Fox News and others. It's taking forever, but it is going to trial ... for 1.6 billion.

I think that's the only way to stop Fox and people like Hannity and Carlson. Sue them into oblivion. Of course, that isn't cheap.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisond...h=31d51ce120e2

I wish there was a way to crack down on places claiming to be news on the air but entertainment when pressed by Courts without backlash against things like the Daily Show or The Onion in petty turnabout.

[Malvolio]

There's the Dominion and Smartmatic voting machine companies defamation lawsuit against Fox News and others. It's taking forever, but it is going to trial ... for 1.6 billion.

I think that's the only way to stop Fox and people like Hannity and Carlson. Sue them into oblivion. Of course, that isn't cheap.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisond...h=31d51ce120e2

Can they sue the entire network? Because what's happened before is that someone like Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly gets sued, FOX News lets them go and then they get replaced by someone like Tucker Carlson or Laura Ingraham. So we get to feel vindicated for a little while, but the drumbeat at FOX News goes on.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Can they sue the entire network? Because what's happened before is that someone like Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly gets sued, FOX News lets them go and then they get replaced by someone like Tucker Carlson or Laura Ingraham. So we get to feel vindicated for a little while, but the drumbeat at FOX News goes on.

And if, by some miracle, Fucker and Ignoramus were sent packing, even worse trolls would replace them. You can’t sue Faux News off the air, not with the Murdochs backing them, and the GQP and the courts will fight tooth and nail to keep the network from being legislated out of existence. Damned frustrating.

[CSTowle]

And yet we've seen the denialism involved in ignoring this sort of thing, regardless of how much proof is shown.



I disagree, it's sheer denialism. Like a toddler who's got chocolate and crumbs all over them denying they ate the cookies, so many of these people haven't seen consequences to their actions for years if ever and reflexively respond "Nuh Uh" when confronted with proof of what their boogeymen (CRT, GRT, etc) are responsible for and how they've personally helped spread the filth that has led to murder. Others are just lying because they know how dangerous this is and they WANT these people dead. Only very few are willfully blinding themselves as you say here as far as I can tell, but they do exist. This individual strikes me as not one of those few.

Could be. Or, could be we'd like to think people who disagree with us are wrong/bad/evil/inherently racist/etc. so that we can dehumanize them to some extent and wish the worst on and for them. It's much easier to feel righteous anger at evil than frustration at an inability to communicate or reason with ignorance.

Even coming from the right place morally (and again, we can easily fall into the trap of thinking we've somehow stumbled onto objective moral truth that can't be questioned when we're just individuals with ignorance/biases/blindspots of our own) it's not really helpful from a problem solving standpoint to just reflexively attack like a crab poked with a stick.

It's useful if we'd like to pat ourselves on the back and feel morally superior, or to gain kudos from like-minded folk in our circles/bubbles as we make fun of the "less enlightened", but it does f##k-all in the real world.

That said, there are examples of ignorance and hatred too deeply ingrained to be realistically countered or argued with and in those cases the threat (if any) should be identified and addressed. But when you match ignorance and intractability with ignorance and intractability it just becomes a hatred feedback loop, and tells those who are neutral or leaning away from you but open to ideas and suggestion that you have nothing of value to offer and instead they'll be repelled by you as they are by the extremists on the other side.

In a war of ideas you need more than just the best ideas, you need to be able to make a convincing argument and get more people on your side of it. That doesn't mean trying to convert Osama Bin Laden to atheism or Donald Trump to honesty or empathy. But it might mean convincing the guy who doesn't pay much attention to politics but knows his wages are staying the same while the price of food, gas, and everything else continues to climb that just reflexively switching teams isn't solely a case of "well that guy didn't work, let's try this one" and that there are serious consequences (as seen by the coming overturning of Roe) to choosing the Red Team.

As the last election cycle (and most since I've been voting) showed, it doesn't take many nudges in any direction to change the outcome. As many Hillary supporters said in '16 (and '08), "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good". Or heck, do but don't act surprised when it blows up in all of our faces.

[Zelena]

I disagree. I would say it's important to point out the difference between a person being mentally ill and the concept of being "not guilty by reason of insanity". We all have biases and flaws, and many more of us than we'd probably be comfortable with hold views that don't jibe comfortably with reality.

Perhaps absorbed by family, community, religion, political affiliation, etc. or comforting or empowering ideas that are held by others despite lack of evidence or logic.

Not all of those are signs of mental illness, but once a certain threshold has been reached (thinking it's OK to take the lives of others short of self defense or other extremely rare and justifiable conditions, for example) it's worth considering and in the extreme it's even likely to be the case.

Labeling something as evil (especially inherently, unchangeably evil) may feel good from our own moral standing and allow us to more easily pass judgment and render punishment, but it's not real handy for identifying the problem and looking to solve it or prevent it from happening in the first place.

Of course, it’s interesting to understand why such people do such things… But in fine a man’s heart is a mystery, not predictable like a machine and focusing on the mental illness as if a man could be fixed like a car makes lose sight of a truth: a man with a knife does less damage than a man with a machine gun…

People have free will for better or for worse…

[Iron Maiden]

One of these days someone in the legal profession will find a way to launch a lawsuit against FN, resulting in them either paying a huge penalty and/or forcing TC to humiliate himself with retractions and apologies and/or fire TC as a liability.

I've been wishing for that for years but things look pretty dim to me right now. The brainwashing that has happening for over a decade has taken root. This pandemic aftermath isn't helping either. But at least one bright spot is that Abbott will resume producing baby formula so that one less thing Fox can stop wagging their finger at President Biden about.

[seismic-2]

One of these days someone in the legal profession will find a way to launch a lawsuit against FN, resulting in them either paying a huge penalty and/or forcing TC to humiliate himself with retractions and apologies and/or fire TC as a liability.

An April 2023 jury trial has been scheduled in Dominion Voting Systems Inc's $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit accusing Fox News of trying to boost its ratings by falsely claiming the voting machine company rigged the 2020 U.S. presidential election against former President Donald Trump.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tri...ms-2022-04-12/

[babyblob]

I've been wishing for that for years but things look pretty dim to me right now. The brainwashing that has happening for over a decade has taken root. This pandemic aftermath isn't helping either. But at least one bright spot is that Abbott will resume producing baby formula so that one less thing Fox can stop wagging their finger at President Biden about.

They will still blame him. No matter what. Tucker did a story last week about baby Formula being sent to the immigrant centers along the border and how American Children were starving so Biden can give formula to the immigrants that shouldnt even be here. You think they are just going to let that narrative drop during the elections?

[Dalak]

Could be. Or, could be we'd like to think people who disagree with us are wrong/bad/evil/inherently racist/etc. so that we can dehumanize them to some extent and wish the worst on and for them. It's much easier to feel righteous anger at evil than frustration at an inability to communicate or reason with ignorance.

Even coming from the right place morally (and again, we can easily fall into the trap of thinking we've somehow stumbled onto objective moral truth that can't be questioned when we're just individuals with ignorance/biases/blindspots of our own) it's not really helpful from a problem solving standpoint to just reflexively attack like a crab poked with a stick.

It's useful if we'd like to pat ourselves on the back and feel morally superior, or to gain kudos from like-minded folk in our circles/bubbles as we make fun of the "less enlightened", but it does f##k-all in the real world.

That said, there are examples of ignorance and hatred too deeply ingrained to be realistically countered or argued with and in those cases the threat (if any) should be identified and addressed. But when you match ignorance and intractability with ignorance and intractability it just becomes a hatred feedback loop, and tells those who are neutral or leaning away from you but open to ideas and suggestion that you have nothing of value to offer and instead they'll be repelled by you as they are by the extremists on the other side.

In a war of ideas you need more than just the best ideas, you need to be able to make a convincing argument and get more people on your side of it. That doesn't mean trying to convert Osama Bin Laden to atheism or Donald Trump to honesty or empathy. But it might mean convincing the guy who doesn't pay much attention to politics but knows his wages are staying the same while the price of food, gas, and everything else continues to climb that just reflexively switching teams isn't solely a case of "well that guy didn't work, let's try this one" and that there are serious consequences (as seen by the coming overturning of Roe) to choosing the Red Team.

As the last election cycle (and most since I've been voting) showed, it doesn't take many nudges in any direction to change the outcome. As many Hillary supporters said in '16 (and '08), "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good". Or heck, do but don't act surprised when it blows up in all of our faces.

You were talking of people ignoring reality in favor of what they want to be true, and people that have gone that far down the hole are incredibly hard to reach. While not all politically related I've dealt with several people like that in my life and I've learned that it's like arguing with a brick wall, or someone pretending to be one. I don't mind discussing things with people who are willing to listen and genuinely respond, but I've learned that far too many come here just to antagonize or outright lie and spread whatever misinformation they can that enforces the story they want told. It's like the difference between our recent russian propagandist and babyblob, one came aggressively from the beginning and when their views were questioned doubled down at every opportunity. BB came willing to talk and discuss and has since come to see the same sort of intransigent person in his life as his views have evolved. I've lived my entire life in one red state or another so I've dealt with many I disagree with but I only seem to get in heated arguments here online.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

I've lived my entire life in one red state or another so I've dealt with many I disagree with but I only seem to get in heated arguments here online.

Because anonymity allows people to reveal their true nature without fear of repercussion. In person (and without a crowd to amplify their bad urges) people are manageable. Once you get online though...

[babyblob]

Just to show the difference between the current president and the last.

After the Charlottesville protests and a White Supremist plowed a car into a crowd of protesters Trump said "There are bad actors on both sides." And refused to denounce White Supremist and hate.

After a mass shooting in Buffalo by a White Supremist Biden gives a speech talking about the dangers of hate and racism and the bad things it does to this country. And called on every American to speak out against hate and White Supremists.

That alone speaks volumes about the values of the two men and the parties they represent.

[Reviresco]

Can they sue the entire network? Because what's happened before is that someone like Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly gets sued, FOX News lets them go and then they get replaced by someone like Tucker Carlson or Laura Ingraham. So we get to feel vindicated for a little while, but the drumbeat at FOX News goes on.

Apparently, yes, you can sue the entire network, as well as individuals -- which is apparently what both Dominion and Smartmatic are doing. IIRC, there was an employee who was named by some of the Fox and other right wing 'network' opinionators, and he was sueing them also, as he had to go into hiding. The poll workers in Georgia are suing also, I believe.

And if, by some miracle, Fucker and Ignoramus were sent packing, even worse trolls would replace them. You can’t sue Faux News off the air, not with the Murdochs backing them, and the GQP and the courts will fight tooth and nail to keep the network from being legislated out of existence. Damned frustrating.

I don't know how deep the pockets of the Murdochs are but 1.6 BILLION from just Dominion ... how many of those hits can they take?

[babyblob]

I don't know how deep the pockets of the Murdochs are but 1.6 BILLION from just Dominion ... how many of those hits can they take?

even if they win they may not have to pay that much. At least it will be a while. The trial next year. However long that lasts. Appeals and such and the amount they have to pay may get lowered it has happened in civil cases before. So even if they do lose the amount they pay may differ and it will be many many years before a payout has to happen. I dont think the Murdochs are overly worried.

[seismic-2]

I don't know how deep the pockets of the Murdochs are but 1.6 BILLION from just Dominion ... how many of those hits can they take?

At least for as long as they have this billion-dollar law suit hanging over their heads (the jury trial is now scheduled for next April), then Fox News will need to be a lot more circumspect about promoting false claims about voting machine fraud. "Anything you say may be held against you in a court of law..."

[babyblob]

At least for as long as they have this billion-dollar law suit hanging over their heads (the jury trial is now scheduled for next April), then Fox News will need to be a lot more circumspect about promoting false claims about voting machine fraud. "Anything you say may be held against you in a court of law..."

if I were the lawyers for Fox News I would stack the jury with all the Trumpers and right wingers I can find. That is really the only way they can hope to win.