No. of Recommendations: 16
I just mentioned that Neil Cavuto covered the story on his 4PM cable news show.
Just so we're clear, The 4pm show is about the lowest rated slot of Fox's entire broadcast day. It's the equivalent of a newspaper putting a correction about slandering someone back on page 62, buried in the classifieds underneath the weight loss and lawyer ambulance chasing ads. More than that, making an announcement 'once', when the preponderance of evidence is that you made the false claim hundreds of times on every program on the network (Hannity, Carlson, Pirro, Bartiromo, Dobbs, Fox & Friends, Ingraham, etc.) isn't just too cute by half, it's simply dishonest.
But you want astonishing dishonesty? Here's the Fox statement.
' We are pleased to have reached a settlement of our dispute with Dominion Voting Systems. We acknowledge the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects FOX's continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues.'
The only ones to suffer from an 'acrimonious trial' would be the Fox personalities and management which put it there - KNOWINGLY broadcasting falsehoods, as their internal correspondences clearly indicate.
You might think the largest single monetary settlement in 1st Amendment history would be worthy of more than 'a mention' on a low rated program on one anonymous afternoon, no? Well, actually no. It's another trait of their dishonesty, that of 'amplification' and 'disregard.' Who remembers how many times we heard 'Hillary's e-mails!' Or perhaps 'Benghazi!'. Or the issues simply made up out of thin air: 'War on Christmas' and the like.
Deciding what to cover is as big a part of their trick as 'what to say.'
I can only hope that Smartmatic takes them to trial, and insists on multiple, repeated, loud, serious public retractions and apologies. You know, like Murdoch did when he closed down one of his London newspapers after the ethic-free journalists he hired there wer caught invading the voice mails of dead children, celebrities, and the Royals. That one cost him more than the $787 million in this one, but I have hope that this one will cost him even more.
And even then, I suspect he, and the company, will learn nothing from it, as they have so aptly demonstrated thus far.
