media matters

[Farfromgeneva]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... cellation/

"About a month ago, I was having a chat with a Black editor. We got around to talking about our experiences. As the conversation went on, we agreed that we definitely shared one thing as Black people doing public discourse work: precariousness.

To be a Black public figure who chooses to be honest about white supremacy in this country is dangerous business. And there is no starker example of that than Tiffany Cross — whose show, “The Cross Connection,” was canceled last month by MSNBC, and whose contract with the network wasn’t renewed.

Cross, a former D.C. bureau chief for BET Networks and an associate producer for CNN, was named host of “The Cross Connection” in late 2020. The show aired Saturday mornings and was one of the higher-rated weekend political shows for the network. It was also one of the few shows left on a major news network that centered the voices of Black people and others of color. Cross focused on matters domestic and international, doing shows, for instance, on global diaspora movements.

She was unapologetic about discussing white supremacy and did not hold back on matters of race. This, of course, drew the ire of the right-wing chattering class, who increasingly singled her out. In October, after Cross (rightly) noted how White men dominate the NFL’s coaching and ownership ranks, Megyn Kelly called her a “dumbass” and “the most racist person on television.” Later that month, Fox News’s Tucker Carlson went on a 10-minute tirade against Cross and MSNBC, accusing Cross of stoking hatred against White people, and comparing her show to the radio broadcasts that led to the Rwandan genocide.

I’m not making this up.

Shortly after that, on Nov. 4, news broke that MSNBC was parting ways with Cross, just days before the midterm elections. It was a stunning announcement — and, particularly for Black journalists, a reminder that the rug could be pulled out from under us at any time. She was not even given the dignity of a final, sign-off show.

It’s all a bad look, sending the message that we can be abruptly de-platformed for stirring up the right-wing media pot. Two years after the supposed “global reckoning” on race, we are still disposable.

The symbolism of Cross’s de-platforming is all the more concerning considering the political times we live in, when attacks against Black educators, authors and journalists are increasing across the country. In a letter to MSNBC, more than 40 Black leaders protested: “This season is too grave a moment in American history to silence the voices of Black Women who, time and again, save America from itself.” (So far, the National Association of Black Journalists has been quiet.)

NBC has lost a number of prominent Black voices over the years, especially Black women. Melissa Harris-Perry’s popular MSNBC weekend show was canceled in 2016. In 2017, Tamron Hall was pushed out. MSNBC’s Peacock hub canceled Zerlina Maxwell’s and Joshua Johnson’s shows, and both left the network.

The situation is all the more disheartening considering that MSNBC’s current president is a Black woman, Rashida Jones. We are made to hope and believe that representation at the upper ranks will understand and support our voices. Sadly, this is not always the case.

I am surprised, but not shocked, that this isn’t a bigger story for U.S. media journalists. Cross has retained a lawyer, and is reportedly looking to challenge her firing. Her case is an important one to watch. We should be glad she’s fighting for her voice, and the voices of so many of the other communities she featured — but it’s awful that a star such as her even has to. If this can happen to Cross, all Black journalists are on shaky ground."

My neighbor is a producer for a media personality. He did spot duty on 60 Minutes. I am going to sent her that article and ask for her perspective.

Feels like a little talking their book and job protection to me but I don’t have the same experience. Just see fear and cost cutting hard in that sector and wouldn’t want jobs protected that aren’t adding value to the enterprise because that eventually takes the whole ship down.

[Farfromgeneva]

CNN, Gannett, Other Media Giants Resort to Layoffs Ahead of Potential Downturn

Entertainment and publishing firms look to cut costs amid streaming losses and ad slowdown

By Sarah KrouseFollow
and Joe FlintFollow
Dec. 3, 2022 8:00 am ET

News organizations, TV networks, movie and television studios, and entertainment giants laid off hundreds of workers over the past week alone, including Warner Bros. Discovery Inc.’s WBD -0.69% CNN and Paramount Global’s PARA 1.04% television-production units.

The moves come after many entertainment companies spent the past few years spending heavily on streaming services that are now a drag on financial results. Traditional broadcast and cable television, meanwhile, continue to face viewer and subscriber erosion.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Add on fears of a recession and a slowdown in ad spending, and an industry that managed to survive and in some cases thrive as audiences swelled during the Covid-19 pandemic is now in retreat.


As Disney’s theme parks set records, its streaming business lost nearly $1.5 billion in the most recent quarter. Photo: Zack Wittman for The Wall Street Journal
Walt Disney Co., Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount Global lost a combined $2.5 billion on streaming in the most recent quarter alone and are now trying to rein in costs. On Tuesday, AMC Networks Inc. said it would cut 20% of its U.S. workforce, citing the inability of its streaming apps to make up for losses from cord-cutting.

At CNN, low ratings, advertising concerns and challenges at its parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery, led to layoffs this past week. In a memo to staff, CNN Chairman Chris Licht said CNN’s sister channel HLN would stop carrying live programming as part of its cost-saving efforts.

Gannett Co., GCI 4.88% the publisher of many newspapers, including USA Today, on Thursday began laying off more than 200 people, on top of another 400 job cuts earlier this year. The Washington Post on Wednesday said it would stop publishing its Sunday print magazine, resulting in the loss of about 10 jobs.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

As interest rates continue to climb and earnings slump, WSJ’s Dion Rabouin explains why we can expect to see a bigger wave of layoffs in the near future. Illustration: Elizabeth Smelov
The Labor Department said Friday that the U.S. labor market remained historically tight. Employment in the information sector has grown faster than the broader labor market in recent months, with jobs increasing 5% from January through November, about twice as fast as overall employment over the same period.

It could take time for ongoing layoffs to show up in economic data because there is typically a gap between when companies announce them and when people are let go and actually leave payrolls, according to some economists. Some laid-off workers are also quickly finding new roles as overall job openings remain abundant.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

What does the wave of job cuts tell you about the state of the economy? Join the conversation below.

Neil Begley, a senior vice president at the ratings firm Moody’s Investors Service, said even though the job market remains strong, many companies are worried about a potential recession. Those economic concerns and layoffs by other companies make it easier for companies to reduce head count.

“There’s a nasty expression: You can’t let a perfectly good crisis go to waste,” he said.

NPR on Wednesday said that a decline in corporate sponsorships in light of “a worldwide economic shock” meant it must cut at least $10 million from its budget for the year and that it would essentially freeze hiring. The company said it would try to avoid layoffs.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Magna, a unit of Interpublic Group of Cos.’s Mediabrands, in September said it expected U.S. ad spending to grow at a slower pace next year.


Warner Bros. Discovery has laid off more than 1,000 since the merger of Discovery and WarnerMedia. Photo: Bing Guan/Bloomberg News
Entertainment companies are facing pressures that extend beyond the macroeconomic environment. Their huge bets on streaming now look shakier, as the market for streaming subscriptions is maturing in the U.S. and competition to add customers among a slew of rivals is cutthroat.

“As it becomes more crowded and competition becomes more fierce, there’s less to reap,” said Zuhayeer Musa, co-founder of Levels.fyi, which helps workers negotiate offers from a range of companies, including tech and media firms.

Netflix Inc. was one of the first streaming companies to cut staff and costs, laying off more than 400 people earlier this year. Some media executives said Netflix’s moves—which came as the company lost subscribers for the first time in a decade—prompted a greater focus at other companies with streaming services on controlling costs and trying to improve profitability.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Newsletter Sign-up

What’s News

Catch up on the headlines, understand the news and make better decisions, free in your inbox every day.

Warner Bros. Discovery is facing an added set of challenges: reducing the heavy debt load stemming from the April merger of Discovery and AT&T Inc.’s WarnerMedia unit. The company, whose properties include HBO Max, Discovery+, the Warner Bros. movie and TV studios and cable channels including CNN and TNT, has laid off more than 1,000 workers since the deal’s completion.

Disney, whose streaming business lost nearly $1.5 billion in the most recent quarter alone, recently fired Chief Executive Bob Chapek and brought back his predecessor, Robert Iger, to the helm. Disney on Tuesday warned in a regulatory filing that it might face an impairment charge as it restructures its business.

In his first employee town hall since his return, Mr. Iger said Disney would give priority to making money over adding subscribers in its streaming business.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Comcast Corp.’s NBCUniversal is expected to make job reductions as part of cost-cutting across the unit, according to people familiar with the matter. NBCUniversal recently completed a voluntary retirement program that offered buyouts to people age 57 or older.

Paramount Global’s CBS unit recently restructured its entertainment operations as part of a cost-cutting effort, leading to the departures of two senior executives. There have also been cuts at Paramount’s ad sales units and production units at both CBS and Paramount.


‘Better Call Saul’ is one of the shows on AMC Networks, which said it is laying off about 200 people.Photo: Greg Lewis/AMC/Sony Pictures Television
AMC Networks, the home of many popular TV shows, including “The Walking Dead” and “Better Call Saul,” on Tuesday said it was laying off about 200 people to save resources as it struggles to generate enough money from its streaming services to make up for the continued decline of cable television.

Roku Inc., the largest maker of streaming devices in the U.S., last month said it planned to lay off about 200 employees. The company, which sells ads viewed on its own streaming service, the Roku Channel, and ads that appear on other streaming services viewed on Roku devices, said advertisers were reducing their fourth-quarter ad spending because of uncertainty over a potential recession.

“They aren’t spending with anyone,” Chief Executive Anthony Wood told investors recently. “It’s not just they’re not spending with us.”

—Sarah Chaney Cambon contributed to this article.

Write to Sarah Krouse at [email protected] and Joe Flint at [email protected]

[njbill]

This is so sad. So very sad.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox ... 37421.html

[Seacoaster(1)]

This is so sad. So very sad.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox ... 37421.html

Wow. Tough punch to absorb.

[Typical Lax Dad]

please, please, please. We need another Teddy Roosevelt. We won't get one, but boy do I want one.

Unfortunately we are going the other direction - the monopolies aren't just regional or national, they are becoming global.

Where we don't have monopoly we have oligopoly with conformity bordering on collusion.

I am old enough to remember when you held your breath when going for Hart-Scott approvals on M&A deals. There was a very real risk that you would get turned down. Deals that were nail biters as late as the early 90's wouldn't even get reviewed today. .... all part of how Bill Clinton made the Dems the party of Wall Street!

Interesting you should mention T.R. A veritable very noisy Bull Moose in a China shop as far as the Republican Party was concerned vis-à-vis his penchant for progressivism and self-importance in a political party controlled by the big banks and corporations looking to keep low profiles but to basically cook the books to their own advantage. The party bosses really needed to find a place where T.R. could not do those interests any real damage and found the perfect position - Vice President on the ticket with their boy McKinley at the top of the ticket in 1900 (McKinley's running mate in 1896 Garrett Hobart expired a year before the 1900 election). Well, after the election, old McKinley took a trip to Buffalo NY in 1901 to visit the Pan-American Exposition and an anarchist named Leon Czolgosz shot him while shaking hands in a reception line. McKinley died 8 days later and Teddy went from very irrelevant to very important overnight.

TR is unequivocally my favorite president. His history is fascinating - from "sickly" son of (what I think must have been) a "mommy dearest" mother to the head of the Rough Riders and symbol of American Masculinity. Old family trust funder champion of the "regular man".

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/04/politics ... index.html

We got one.

[Seacoaster(1)]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/busi ... wsuit.html

“Lachlan Murdoch, the chief executive of the Fox Corporation, is expected to be deposed on Monday as part of a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News for amplifying bogus claims that rigged machines from Dominion Voting Systems were responsible for Donald J. Trump’s defeat in 2020.

Mr. Murdoch will be the most senior corporate figure within the Fox media empire to face questions under oath in the case so far. And his appearance before Dominion’s lawyers is a sign of how unexpectedly far and fast the lawsuit has progressed in recent weeks — and how contentious it has become.

Fox and Dominion have gone back and forth in Delaware state court since the summer in an escalating dispute over witnesses, evidence and testimony. The arguments point to the high stakes of the case, which will render a judgment on whether the most powerful conservative media outlet in the country intentionally misled its audience and helped seed one of the most pervasive lies in American politics.

Although the law leans in the media’s favor in defamation cases, Dominion has what independent observers have said is an unusually strong case. Day after day, Fox hosts and guests repeated untrue stories about Dominion’s ties to communist regimes and far-fetched theories about how its software enabled enemies of the former president to steal his votes.

“This is a very different kind of case,” said David A. Logan, dean of the Roger Williams School of Law, who has argued in favor of loosening some libel laws. “Rarely do cases turn on a weekslong pattern of inflammatory, provably false, but also oddly inconsistent statements.”

Dominion, in its quest to obtain the private communications of as many low-, mid- and high-level Fox personnel as possible, hopes to prove that people inside the network knew they were disseminating lies. Fox hopes to be able sow doubt about that by showing how its hosts pressed Trump allies for evidence they never produced and that Dominion machines were vulnerable to hacking, even if no hacking took place.

The judge, Eric M. Davis, has ruled in most instances in Dominion’s favor, allowing the voting company to expand the pool of potential evidence it can present to a jury to include text messages from the personal phones of Fox employees and the employment contracts of star hosts such as Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, along with those of Suzanne Scott, the chief executive of Fox News Media, and her top corporate managers.

Dominion has conducted dozens of depositions with current and former network personalities, producers, business managers and executives. The people questioned come from the rungs of middle management at Fox News headquarters in Manhattan to the corner office in Century City, Los Angeles, where Mr. Murdoch oversees the Fox Corporation and its sprawling enterprise of conservative media outlets.

The fight over depositions has intensified in recent weeks as lawyers for the two companies sparred over whether Mr. Hannity and another pro-Trump host, Jeanine Pirro, should have to sit for a second round of questioning about messages that Dominion obtained from their phones as part of the discovery process. Fox lawyers have argued that the hosts should not be compelled to testify again, citing the legal protections that journalists have against being forced to reveal confidential sources.

The judge ruled that Dominion’s lawyers could question both Mr. Hannity and Ms. Pirro again but limited the scope of what they could ask. Ms. Pirro’s second deposition was late last month; Mr. Hannity’s has yet to be scheduled.

Fox has accused Dominion in court filings of making “escalating demands” for documents that are voluminous in quantity, saying it would have to hire a second litigation team to accommodate such a “crushing burden.” (The judge has largely disagreed.)

In a sign of the simmering tensions between the two sides, Fox lawyers have asked the court to impose tens of thousands of dollars in sanctions against Dominion. Fox has accused the voting machine company’s chief executive, John Poulos, and other senior company officials of failing to preserve their emails and text messages, as parties to a lawsuit are required to do with potentially relevant evidence.

After Dominion filed its lawsuit in March 2021 — claiming that Fox’s coverage of its machines not only cost it hundreds of millions of dollars in business but “harmed the idea of credible elections” — many media law experts assumed this case would end like many other high-profile defamation case against a news organization: with a settlement.

Fox News has a history of settling sensitive lawsuits before they reach a jury. In the last several years alone, it has paid tens of millions of dollars in claims: to women who reported sexual harassment by its former chief executive, Roger Ailes, and by prominent hosts including Bill O’Reilly; as well as to the family of Seth Rich, a former Democratic Party staff member who was killed in a robbery that some conservatives tried to link to an anti-Clinton conspiracy theory.

But a settlement with Dominion appears to be a remote possibility at this point. Fox has said that the broad protections provided to the media under the First Amendment shield it from liability. The network says it was merely reporting on Mr. Trump’s accusations, which are protected speech even if the president is lying. Dominion’s complaint outlines examples in which Fox hosts did more than just report those false claims, they endorsed them.

“This does not appear to be a case that’s going to settle — but anything can happen,” said Dan K. Webb, a noted trial lawyer who is representing Fox in the dispute. “There are some very fundamental First Amendment issues here, and those haven’t changed.”

[kramerica.inc]

Longtime NBC reporter and newscaster Miguel Almaguere remains suspended for "not meeting NBC standards" on the initial Paul Pelosi story.

But no news on what standards were broken, what was erroneous about the report, or who wrote/approved the script in the first place.

Here is the report in question:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/nbc-news- ... one-damage

Who cares.

Yup, no media introspection.

NBC made the story, reporter and any talk of it disappear ... for our own good.

Glad you're doing your part.

Ever see "the Insider" with Robert DeNiro and Russell Crow?

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. This is nothing new. The ONLY difference in 2022 is that Right Wing America is FINALLY paying attention.

The libs have been trying to tell you about this stuff since (at the very least) the 60's, Kram. What's upsetting the right is that THEIR TEAM were the ones running the media all these many decades, pulling the strings....and now "someone else" owns media assets.

Haven't seen that one. It appears to be a rainy week ahead- I'll have to look it up.

I don't care about the nature of Paul and Nancy's marriage. It happens on both sides of the political spectrum, I'm sure. The nature of the relationship isn't the issue. It IS interesting that the news was changed or being scrubbed, for what appears to be public perception. I'd be more comfortable if it was scrubbed because the report was factually wrong, or it included information sensitive to a successful prosecution of the attacker. That is reasonable. But the reason wasn't given, so it becomes very murky and creates a confidence issue with the outlet.

I was part of the "left wing media machine." at an old job.

Reporters are really at the mercy of the editor who is the gatekeeper of content to the public. IMO It is interesting that the report got out and then was scrubbed and erased completely with no explanation.

I weekly saw editors spin headlines/ledes, bury important facts/quotes/features to push a message or be sympathetic to a cause. Less common, I saw editors rewrite wand focuis on tertiary issues that met their agenda. And just a couple times, I saw the publisher mandate an issue be covered OR dropped. It was always under the guise of "readership" and attracting eyeballs. Never forget, News outlets dont have a obligation to give the news unbiased. It is to sell news and get more readers.

I say that, but for the most part, it was all pretty monotonous, open and procedural. Most newsrooms were filled with reporters who covered what they thought was most important. You knew what the editors/publishers wanted. And mostly that was eyes, but they did have an agenda and people they liked, disliked, were gunning for, or gave cover to. But the newsroom (or editorial board) was mostly balanced in deciding the bulk of the issues.

I find it interesting because it's high profile on all levels- The subjects involved, the reporter, and the reach that the initial report had. I haven't seen anything in recent memory quite to this level.

[a fan]

I was part of the "left wing media machine." at an old job.

I remember. But I hate to break it to you....that paper wasn't leftie. It was "establishment", as are all major outlets like that one. Ask a REAL lefty what they thought of your job. Not center. Not center left. The real, bomb throwing, far left. They hated you, I promise you.

The Insider was about the 60 Minutes piece on big tobacco that CBS execs buried to keep a merger on track. Money. As always.

I weekly saw editors spin headlines/ledes, bury important facts/quotes/features to push a message or be sympathetic to a cause. Less common, I saw editors rewrite wand focuis on tertiary issues that met their agenda. And just a couple times, I saw the publisher mandate an issue be covered OR dropped. It was always under the guise of "readership" and attracting eyeballs. Never forget, News outlets dont have a obligation to give the news unbiased. It is to sell news and get more readers.

Thank you! We're 100% on the same exact page.

I find it offensive, and frankly terrifying, that millions of Americans think that this sort of thing just started happening in media 10 minutes ago. And that the media bias is left wing. Nope. It's about MONEY. Always has been, always will be. And this has been happening since the Press was invented.

I find it interesting because it's high profile on all levels- The subjects involved, the reporter, and the reach that the initial report had. I haven't seen anything in recent memory quite to this level.

That's because you're not on the inside anymore, watching this happen every day.

[youthathletics]

Quite similar to the 'professional courtesy' that takes places with those in the blue uniform, discussed on another thread with the Tampa Police Chief. Haven't seen many editors resign when caught in the cookie jar.

[a fan]

Quite similar to the 'professional courtesy' that takes places with those in the blue uniform, discussed on another thread with the Tampa Police Chief. Haven't seen many editors resign when caught in the cookie jar.

And those with Musk. I'd give ANYTHING for a whistleblower to show Musk's communications with politicians for SpaceX and twitter. Those billions in EV tax credits didn't fall from the sky.....Musk worked with favored DC insiders to get those.

But I like that he's pretending like "only twitter does this stuff.....".

And naturally, Musk and his crew would NEVER field calls from politician's aides now that he's running twitter. He's a saint.

[Farfromgeneva]

Quite similar to the 'professional courtesy' that takes places with those in the blue uniform, discussed on another thread with the Tampa Police Chief. Haven't seen many editors resign when caught in the cookie jar.

There’s a legal authority difference that makes the comparison limited at best.

[youthathletics]

Quite similar to the 'professional courtesy' that takes places with those in the blue uniform, discussed on another thread with the Tampa Police Chief. Haven't seen many editors resign when caught in the cookie jar.

There’s a legal authority difference that makes the comparison limited at best.

Especially when Editors are receiving (cough-cough) immunity from the very people to which they are protecting/propping up.

[Farfromgeneva]

Quite similar to the 'professional courtesy' that takes places with those in the blue uniform, discussed on another thread with the Tampa Police Chief. Haven't seen many editors resign when caught in the cookie jar.

There’s a legal authority difference that makes the comparison limited at best.

Especially when Editors are receiving (cough-cough) immunity from the very people to which they are protecting/propping up.

They don’t get to take lives from this planet.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Pretty rare in my experience to have these "apex" depositions happen; Lachlan, Suzanne Scott and now Rupert:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... gn=wp_main

"Rupert Murdoch, the 91-year-old chairman of Fox News parent company Fox Corp, will be forced to answer questions under oath next week about his network’s coverage of the 2020 presidential election.

Murdoch will be deposed on the mornings of Dec. 13 and Dec. 14 as part of election technology company Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News, according to a filing in Delaware’s Superior Court. The lawsuit alleges that the network purposely aired false claims about Dominion’s role in the 2020 presidential election to boost ratings and fight off competition from more-conservative-leaning television networks.

According to the filing, Murdoch’s deposition will be conducted remotely, via videoconference.

Rupert Murdoch is the highest-profile person to be deposed by lawyers for Dominion, which has spent the past few months hauling in network executives, producers and hosts to answer questions about whether they knew that claims made about Dominion technology on Fox’s airwaves were false. Many of the most egregious comments were made by unpaid guests, including Donald Trump-affiliated attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, though some were echoed by Fox hosts including Jeanine Pirro, Maria Bartiromo and Lou Dobbs, who no longer works for the company.

On Monday, Rupert Murdoch’s eldest son, Lachlan Murdoch, sat for an in-person deposition at a law firm office in Los Angeles. Murdoch is the executive chair and CEO of Fox Corp, and is considered to be the likely successor to his media titan father. James Murdoch, who was once chief executive of the then-Fox News parent company 21st Century Fox but has since cut ties with the family’s media entities, was deposed on Oct. 25.

Dominion lawyers have also deposed prominent Fox hosts including Sean Hannity, Pirro and Tucker Carlson, as well as former on-air personalities, including Shepard Smith. In doing so, lawyers for the election technology company have attempted to probe the internal culture and reporting practices of the highest-rated cable news network. The company has also obtained reams of internal communications sent by Fox employees and executives.

Suzanne Scott, the chief executive of Fox News, was deposed on Nov. 1, while Fox News president Jay Wallace was deposed two weeks later.

Hannity’s Aug. 31 deposition lasted more than seven hours, according to court records. He was asked specifically about a Nov. 30, 2020 episode in which Powell claimed that Dominion “ran an algorithm that shaved off votes from Trump and awarded them to Biden” and “used the machines to inject and add massive quantities of votes for Mr. Biden.” Dominion had previously warned Fox reporters and producers that audits and reviews had found no evidence of fraud or miscounting of votes in the election. Hannity aired Powell’s attack on Dominion “despite knowing it was false, and knowing it was coming,” the company said in one court filing, while Pirro “hosted Powell and endorsed her statements.”

Fox News has argued that Dominion’s lawsuit is an affront to the principles of press freedom and that the amount of money being demanded is “outrageous.” The company’s lawyers have said that Fox merely covered newsworthy claims of election fraud made by a highly public figure.

“There are very few events in the last 50 years in this country that I think are more newsworthy than our president alleging that our entire Democratic system was put on its head by a voting machine company stealing votes,” veteran trial lawyer Dan Webb, who is representing Fox, told The Washington Post in August.

“Instead of acting responsibly and showing remorse, Fox instead has doubled down,” a spokeswoman for Dominion said in a statement Monday. “We’re focused on holding Fox accountable and are confident the truth will ultimately prevail.”

Fox has sought to shield both Hannity and Pirro from sharing “confidential sources and information,” arguing that it is “a journalist’s right to maintain his confidences.” But Hannity has said in the past that he does not consider himself to be a journalist, and Dominion has argued that even if they do count as journalists, there is no such right when the information is directly relevant to whether Fox acted with “actual malice.”

Neither side in the case has suggested that a settlement in the case could be imminent. If an agreement is not reached, a five-week trial in Delaware Superior Court is set to begin on April 17. Fox News is asking for the case to be combined with an “identical” suit against Fox Corporation, saying Dominion “should not have two chances to drag Fox through massive, public trials.”

[njbill]

I would not want to depose Rupert remotely. Never liked to take a remote or phone deposition of a witness other than a neutral fact witness I was confident would tell the truth straight down the line.

Too much opportunity for hanky-panky with notes, signals, etc. if you are not in the room with the witness. This assumes Rupert’s counsel is in the room with him, which I would say is about a 100% certainty.

Wherever Rupert is, I would go there and insist on deposing him in person.

[Seacoaster(1)]

I would not want to depose Rupert remotely. Never liked to take a remote or phone deposition of a witness other than a neutral fact witness I was confident would tell the truth straight down the line.

Too much opportunity for hanky-panky with notes, signals, etc. if you are not in the room with the witness. This assumes Rupert’s counsel is in the room with him, which I would say is about a 100% certainty.

Wherever Rupert is, I would go there and insist on deposing him in person.

Agree completely. Generally do not like the zoom or video depositions. But this one might depend on what they already got from Scott, Lachlan and the "on air personalities" who pushed the lies.

[a fan]

Two things before I forget: I know for a fact Qanon is an Intelligence operation. Re. Ukraine, I subscribe to much of the mindset of Jeffrey Sachs https://youtu.be/QrmWpI_s7rc

Re. the bogus "Russian Hacking IO, I'm now of the belief that while the DNC's Chalupa hired Harding and exported it to the US for HRC, I think there were much grander aspirations - primarily to help poison Americans' minds re. Russia - to help pave the way for where we are now. The fact that the FBI now admits to 1) having Seth Rich's laptop and 2) Having more than 20k docs related to Seth Rich, and 3) now wants 65 years before it releases them speaks volumes. I worked for WL, and I know Russia was not our source.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-revea ... 16113.html

Think about that. Think about one of the biggest political scandals in modern history. How much did the Mueller probe cost American taxpayers?

+1

Well, with this post you will be slandered, tagged a trumpist in disguise, question all your sources tagging them as tripe, which in the end will write you off as a troll in disguise; its only a matter of time....

I won't question any of it....because I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Can you translate this into English, or summarize what you're alleging?

What do you mean Qanon is an intel operation?

What are you talking about with Seth Rich?

Who is "Harding", and what do you mean by "exporting it"? What's "it"?

Who is "WL"?

[Seacoaster(1)]

More on the Dominion defamation case and the Fox News Corporation's deliberate lies about the Big Lie:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/busi ... ction.html

"On Nov. 30, 2020, Sean Hannity hosted Sidney Powell on his prime-time Fox News program. As she had in many other interviews around that time — on Fox and elsewhere in right-wing media — Ms. Powell, a former federal prosecutor, spun wild conspiracy theories about what she said was “corruption all across the country, in countless districts,” in a plot to steal re-election from the president, Donald J. Trump.

At the center of this imagined plot were machines from Dominion Voting Systems, which Ms. Powell claimed ran an algorithm that switched votes for Mr. Trump to votes for Joseph R. Biden Jr. Dominion machines, she insisted, were being used “to trash large batches of votes.”

Mr. Hannity interrupted her with a gentle question that had been circulating among election deniers, despite a lack of supporting proof: Why were Democrats silencing whistle-blowers who could prove this fraud?

Did Mr. Hannity believe any of this?

“I did not believe it for one second.”

That was the answer Mr. Hannity gave, under oath, in a deposition in Dominion’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News, according to information disclosed in a court hearing on Wednesday. The hearing was called to address several issues that need to be resolved before the case heads for a jury trial, which the judge has scheduled to begin in April.

Mr. Hannity’s disclosure — along with others that emerged from court on Wednesday about what Fox News executives and hosts really believed as their network became one of the loudest megaphones for lies about the 2020 election — is among the strongest evidence yet to emerge publicly that some Fox employees knew that what they were broadcasting was false.

The high legal standard of proof in defamation cases makes it difficult for a company like Dominion to prevail against a media organization like Fox News. Dominion has to persuade a jury that people at Fox were, in effect, saying one thing in private while telling their audience exactly the opposite. And that requires showing a jury convincing evidence that speaks to the state of mind of those who were making the decisions at the network.

In Delaware Superior Court on Wednesday, Dominion’s lawyers argued that they had obtained ample evidence to make that case.

One lawyer for Dominion said that “not a single Fox witness” so far had produced anything supporting the various false claims about the company that were uttered repeatedly on the network. And in some cases, other high-profile hosts and senior executives echoed Mr. Hannity’s doubts about what Mr. Trump and his allies like Ms. Powell were saying, according to the Dominion lawyer, Stephen Shackelford.

This included Meade Cooper, who oversees prime-time programming for Fox News, and the prime-time star Tucker Carlson, Mr. Shackelford said.

“Many of the highest-ranking Fox people have admitted under oath that they never believed the Dominion lies,” he said, naming both Ms. Cooper and Mr. Carlson.

Mr. Shackelford described how Mr. Carlson had “tried to squirm out of it at his deposition” when asked about what he really believed.

Mr. Shackelford started to elaborate about what Mr. Carlson had said privately, telling the judge about the existence of text messages the host had sent in November and December of 2020. But the judge, Eric M. Davis, cut him off, leaving the specific contents of those texts unknown.

A spokeswoman for Fox News declined to comment.

Another previously unknown detail emerged on Wednesday about what was going on inside the Fox universe in those frantic weeks after the election. A second lawyer representing Dominion, Justin Nelson, told Judge Davis about evidence obtained by Dominion showing that an employee of the Fox Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, had tried to intervene with the White House to stop Ms. Powell. According to Mr. Nelson, that employee called the fraud claims “outlandish” and pressed Mr. Trump’s staff to get rid of Ms. Powell, who was advising the president on filing legal challenges to the results.

Mr. Nelson said that evidence cut straight to the heart of whether the Fox Corporation, which is controlled by Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, was also liable for defamation. Judge Davis ruled in June that Dominion could sue the larger, highly profitable corporation, which includes the Fox network on basic television and a lucrative sports broadcasting division.

A spokesman for the Fox Corporation declined to comment.

Over the last several months, Dominion has been combing through mountains of private email and text messages from people at every level of Fox News and the Fox Corporation — hosts like Mr. Hannity, senior executives and midlevel producers. A lawyer for Fox, Dan K. Webb, said on Wednesday that the company had produced more than 52,000 documents for Dominion, with more to come.

During the hearing, the judge was asked to rule on several issues. One was whether a second voting company that is suing Fox for defamation, Smartmatic, could be given access to the documents Dominion had obtained for its case. Judge Davis ruled in Fox’s favor, denying Smartmatic’s motion.

A second issue was whether certain evidence that Dominion has used against Fox in its court filings — including emails among Fox employees and a page from a deposition in which someone from Fox describes the journalistic processes of one of the network’s programs — should be made public.

Throughout the case, Fox has asked the court to keep almost everything in the case pertaining to its inner workings under seal. A third lawyer for Dominion, Davida Brook, argued on Wednesday that the public had a fundamental right to see what it had filed with the court in the interest of fostering the openness that a democracy requires.

Judge Davis disagreed, ruling that the evidence would stay under seal. But he admonished the lawyers that neither party in the case should be overly aggressive in trying to keep facts in the case confidential.

If, for instance, someone says something “not bright” — and therefore embarrassing — that wouldn’t be enough to keep that information under seal, Judge Davis said.

“That’s too bad,” he said."

[Kismet]

Hilarious irony to start off the New Year - CNN management said New Year's Eve hosts couldn't drink or be sloshed while broadcasting New Year's Eve celebrations. As a result, a totally sober Don Lemon MISSED the countdown to 2023 TOTALLY in New Orleans. Where the eff was his producer? Maybe He was sloshed instead. Right before this he engaged in a very sober conversation with a young lady about broke di*cks.

Meanwhile in NYC, Kevin Hart does a live, profanity-laced rant on LIVE TV which, no doubt pleased the bosses at CNN. Andy Cohen and Anderson Cooper then tried to act like they weren't sober.



He went off and was then seen chugging various libations.

They should bring back Kathy Griffin. Even totally sober, she's 10X funnier than any of these people.

[youthathletics]

Quick tick since 2018, but declining for decades.

Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/403166/ame ... d-low.aspx