Fox to pay $787.5m settlement in Dominion defamation trial settlement

[bilateralrope]

This one lawsuit and settlement cost them three quarters of a billion dollars. Exactly how many more of those could the company survive?

Depends how long it takes Congress to do something about the legal loophole that's letting them deduct the entire sum from their taxes, I guess.

See the article Soontir C'boath posted earlier. It looks like they are going to get a $213 million reduction in taxes. Not the full amount, but still larger than I'd like.

[Zaune]

Ah, I see. That's not quite as bad as I thought it was then.

[Broomstick]

This one lawsuit and settlement cost them three quarters of a billion dollars. Exactly how many more of those could the company survive?

Depends how long it takes Congress to do something about the legal loophole that's letting them deduct the entire sum from their taxes, I guess.

Once you've deducted the entire amount of taxes owed you can't keep deducting more.

And once a court has decided you need to pay some other entity X sum you really do have to pay it, and the legal system has amusing ways to make that happen even if you don't cooperate.

"Sued out of existence" is a real thing.

[Broomstick]

This one lawsuit and settlement cost them three quarters of a billion dollars. Exactly how many more of those could the company survive?

Depends how long it takes Congress to do something about the legal loophole that's letting them deduct the entire sum from their taxes, I guess.

See the article Soontir C'boath posted earlier. It looks like they are going to get a $213 million reduction in taxes. Not the full amount, but still larger than I'd like.

That still leaves a half billion dollar hole in their budget.

With more lawsuits on the way.

[Alferd Packer]

I read yesterday that Fox (News Corp, really) has about $4 billion in cash on hand, or rather, has relatively easy access to $4 billion. Less the Dominion settlement, they could weather another 4 settlements of a similar amount.

[Ralin]

Fox News isn't just a business looking to make a profit though. It's part of a right-wing propaganda machine funded and backed by very wealthy people, as well as (directly or indirectly) donations from large numbers of regular people. It's not just about the numbers to them.

[LadyTevar]

I read yesterday that Fox (News Corp, really) has about $4 billion in cash on hand, or rather, has relatively easy access to $4 billion. Less the Dominion settlement, they could weather another 4 settlements of a similar amount.

They COULD, and they are obviously actively trying to avoid more by getting rid of Tucker Carlson.

The question is, how much of a stink is Carlson going to raise over the sudden firing, and just how far will he go to fuck Murdoch et al over at this point? They may have just given a loaded cannon to the opposition.

[Alferd Packer]

Maybe. But Tucker does have several years left on his contract at about $20 million per year. A rich asshole generally doesn't turn down even more money.

I would assume that, as a condition of continuing to receive that money, either as salary or as severance, he is bound by some sort of non-compete, along with an NDA. There is no comparable conservative "news" channel which could afford to hire him/buy out his contract. None of the other news networks in the US would go anywhere near him. At most, he could start a podcast, I guess?

[Solauren]

With the right clauses in his contract, he couldn't even do the Podcast.

[bilateralrope]

Fox Has a Secret ‘Oppo File’ to Keep Tucker Carlson in Check, Sources Say

DIANA FALZONE AND ASAWIN SUEBSAENG
APRIL 25, 2023 7:59PM EDT

Fox News executives have in their possession a dossier of alleged dirt on Tucker Carlson should he attack the network in the wake of his departure, eight sources at and close to the network tell Rolling Stone.

When Fox announced Carlson’s departure on Monday, the network presented the separation as amicable. But according to one former on-air Fox personality, the anchor and some of the channel’s top executives are parting ways on “the worst” and “messiest possible terms.” Indeed, in private communications released last month as part of the Dominion-Fox lawsuit, the now-fired Fox host gossiped that one such exec “hates us,” claiming she was covertly working against him and other hosts.

But if Carlson attempts to torch the network he’s leaving, Fox is prepared, the sources say.

Eight people familiar with the situation tell Rolling Stone that Fox News and its communications department — long led by the notoriously aggressive Irena Briganti — has assembled damaging information about Carlson. One source with knowledge calls it an “oppo file.” Two sources add that Fox is prepared to disclose some of its contents if execs suspect that Carlson is coming after the network.

The file includes internal complaints regarding workplace conduct, disparaging comments about management and colleagues, and allegations that the now-former prime-time host created a toxic work environment, three of the sources say. (Carlson is currently facing a lawsuit from a former senior booking producer, Abby Grossberg, alleging a toxic and misogynist workplace environment. The lawsuit details repeated instances of misogynist behavior at the network, including frequent lewd and sexual discussions of female guests and public figures. Grossberg “continued to endure a work environment that subjugates women based on vile sexist stereotypes, typecasts religious minorities and belittles their traditions, and demonstrates little to no regard for those suffering from mental illness.” Fox denied the allegations when the lawsuit was filed, saying the claims were “without merit.”)

A network spokesperson denied the existence of the file on Carlson. “This is patently absurd and categorically false,” the spokesperson said in a statement to Rolling Stone. “We thank Tucker for his service to the network as a host, and prior to that, as a contributor.”

Many sources within the network disagree. “Irena will never be shy about using these things,” says one network source who is familiar with the Carlson-related complaints.

Over the years, Briganti and Fox PR’s tactics have been turned against its own most prominent talent. For instance, The Daily Beast reported in 2018 that “​​emails reviewed and verified” by the outlet “show that Fox’s communications brass have planted negative stories about some of their own top stars, including hosts like Bill O’Reilly and Stuart Varney — the latter of whom is still a Fox employee.”

Those methods for keeping personnel in line are an open secret among current and former Fox News staff. Four former Fox News personalities confirmed Briganti likes to keep “dirt files” on Fox News talent, including one on Carlson.

An ex-Fox News anchor laments, “Irena tries to keep a file on everybody.… Any talent like Tucker would have a lot of things; other people complaining. They encourage it, and then just keep it on file. It’s just a classic dirty trick.”

“[Briganti] keeps files on everybody to screw with them,” a departed Fox News host adds. “It’s classic Fox.”

The sources say it was not clear what might prompt Briganti or Fox News to use the file. On Monday, it was revealed that Carlson had hired Bryan Freedman, a high-powered entertainment lawyer, to represent him following his Fox exit. Rolling Stone did not receive comment from Carlson at the time of this piece’s publication. Freedman did not respond to Rolling Stone’s request for comment.It’s also unclear what precisely triggered Carlson’s abrupt departure. In addition to the Grossberg suit, he was a prominent figure in Dominion Voting Systems’ legal action against Fox News, which the network settled for $787.5 million earlier this month. In the run-up to trial, it was revealed that Carlson had bashed top brass in text chats with fellow network talent.

“Do the executives understand how much credibility and trust we’ve lost with our audience?” Carlson wrote shortly after Fox News projected Joe Biden had beaten Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election. Regarding Fox News executives, Carlson also privately sniped: “A combination of incompetent liberals and top leadership with too much pride to back down is what’s happening.”

Harshly trashing leadership is considered to be a major transgression at Fox News and Fox Business, where those who step out of line may find themselves on the receiving end of an unfavorable story.

Fox News has a history of taking punitive measures against departed personnel. When Megyn Kelly left the network in 2017 to host a morning talk show on NBC, it was reported that Briganti tried to push stories about the cable news star’s poor television ratings at the time, as well as her asking a Will and Grace fan if the show led him to being gay. Kelly has spoken out against Briganti, publicly noting the Fox spokeswoman’s “vindictiveness.” Briganti’s aggressive methods are widely known in the media. A 2016 New York magazine story titled “The Silencing of Fox News’ Powerful Publicist Irena Briganti” cited several then-Fox female employees who claimed “one of the reasons they did not speak up about sexual harassment in the past was that they were terrified Briganti would find out and smear them in the press.”

The existence of this file doesn't look good for Fox or Tucker. It sounds like blackmail to me. So I hope he goes after Fox hard enough that they use it.

Also, we have some more information on why Fox fired him:

On Eve of Trial, Discovery of Carlson Texts Set Off Crisis Atop Fox

Private messages sent by Tucker Carlson that had been redacted in legal filings showed him making highly offensive remarks that went beyond the comments of his prime-time show.

By Jim Rutenberg, Jeremy W. Peters and Michael S. Schmidt
April 26, 2023

The day before Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation trial against Fox News was set to begin in a Delaware courthouse, the Fox board of directors and top executives made a startling discovery that helped lead to the breaking point between the network and Tucker Carlson, one of its top stars.

Private messages sent by Mr. Carlson that had been redacted in legal filings showed him making highly offensive and crude remarks that went beyond the inflammatory, often racist comments of his prime-time show and anything disclosed in the lead-up to the trial.

Despite the fact that Fox’s trial lawyers had these messages for months, the board and some senior executives were now learning about their details for the first time, setting off a crisis at the highest level of the company, according to two people with knowledge of the discussions.

The discovery added pressure on the Fox leadership as it sought to find a way to avoid a trial where Mr. Carlson — not to mention so many others at the network — would be questioned about the contents of the private messages they exchanged in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.

Two days after the board’s discovery, Fox settled that case for $787.5 million, believed to be the highest for a defamation trial.

Several people with knowledge of Fox’s discussions said the redacted messages were a catalyst for one of the most momentous decisions Fox and its leaders — the father-son team of Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch — had made in years: to sever ties with the host of their highest-rated and highly profitable prime-time program and a face of the network in the Trump era.

The company dismissed him on Monday, with a phone call from Suzanne Scott, the chief executive of Fox News Media.

In the end, according to one of the people with knowledge of the internal discussions, Lachlan Murdoch viewed forcing out Mr. Carlson as a “business decision,” just as he did the Dominion settlement.

Fox had no comment beyond its initial statement announcing “Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways.”

Editors’ Picks

Two Americans Take a Chance in Playa del Carmen, Mexico: Which Condo Did They Buy?

A Fresh View of an Increasingly Familiar Black Hole

‘Enjoy Your Ride!’: Kids With Autism Have a Message for Transit Riders
Mr. Carlson and Bryan Freedman, a lawyer representing him, did not respond to requests for comment. On Wednesday night, Mr. Carlson posted a video on Twitter, speaking publicly for the first time since getting pushed out. Mr. Carlson did not address his exit from Fox, but railed against “completely irrelevant” debates on TV and said: “Both political parties and their donors have reached consensus on what benefits them and they actively collude to shut down any conversation about it.”

He added: “When honest people say what’s true, calmly and without embarrassment, they become powerful. At the same time, the liars who have been trying to silence them shrink. They become weaker.”

It is unclear why the Fox board and other executives did not know about the contents of the redacted messages until just before the trial, which was focused on whether Fox News had knowingly aired false claims about Dominion and its voting machines after the 2020 election. Unredacted portions of the documents, including some in which Mr. Carlson spoke derisively about former President Donald J. Trump, were widely reported on in the weeks before the trial.

The board considered using an outside law firm to investigate the top-rated host, concerned about the harm Mr. Carlson’s behavior might cause even beyond the Dominion case, the two people said.

By the time the board did see the redacted material, Lachlan Murdoch was already moving to find an out-of-court accommodation with Dominion, having given his negotiators the go-ahead to increase Fox’s offer to the company, according to one of the people briefed on the discussions.

Company executives have indicated that a variety of factors fed into the decision to fire Mr. Carlson after Fox stood by him for years as he drew protest and advertiser boycotts for trafficking in conspiracy theories and narratives of white grievance. But they acknowledge that the discovery of what was in the redacted text messages was an important factor in his ultimate dismissal.

The role that the messages — produced in the Dominion discovery process — played in helping to end Mr. Carlson’s career at Fox demonstrates the severity of the damage the suit inflicted on the company. Fox was battered repeatedly by damaging disclosures as it proceeded to trial. If it had settled far earlier in the process, the company could have avoided having to hand over Mr. Carlson’s messages and those of others, including from the personal accounts of both Murdochs.

Over the past two years, the Murdochs’ patience began to wear thin, said people familiar with their complaints. Mr. Carlson emerged as an almost unaccountable figure who drew new headaches with conspiracy theory programming that included falsely portraying the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol as possibly orchestrated by the federal government. Then, as the Dominion case headed to trial, he told his audience last month that the rioting was, in fact, a peaceful exercise, using security footage that the Republican Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, had given to Mr. Carlson exclusively.

Although statements made on his show represented only a small piece of the Dominion lawsuit, the disclosures related to his messages took on an outsize role and added to the company’s public relations woes.

It is notable that even when compared with the extreme rhetoric Mr. Carlson was allowed to use on air, the messages released publicly had the ability to shock. In one, he referred to the lawyer Sidney Powell, a major proponent of the debunked theory that the Dominion machines switched votes, with a crude and misogynistic slur. Amid the cache of redacted messages was one in which he used a similar vulgarity to describe a senior Fox News executive, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

One person briefed on the contents of the redacted material said one of the messages was particularly offensive, adding to the concern at the top of the company. The Times has not seen the contents of the message.

Dominion lawyers planned to press the judge about using the contents of the redacted messages in their questioning of Mr. Carlson. The lawyers prepped dozens of potential questions for the host, along with hypothetical rejoinders they thought Mr. Carlson might use to deflect the toughest of them. And they planned to pin him down on the ones that were most demeaning toward women. The two sides had different views of whether much or any of Mr. Carlson’s unredacted messages would be seen in court — a difference that, at trial, would have been sorted by the presiding judge, Eric M. Davis of Delaware Superior Court.

The settlement of the Dominion case, however, has not ended the threat posed by the messages. The New York Times, The Associated Press and National Public Radio have challenged the redactions, meaning they could still become public.

And Mr. Carlson’s indiscretion has exposed him further. Given how polarizing he has been, both inside and outside Fox News, more evidence of embarrassing and inappropriate conduct could emerge. In video obtained by The Times, for instance, Mr. Carlson is shown off camera discussing his “postmenopausal fans” and whether they will approve of how he looks on the air. In another video, he is overheard describing a woman he finds “yummy.”

His texts could also factor in a pending defamation suit that the software company Smartmatic — often paired with Dominion in the wildest versions of the stolen-election conspiracy theory — has brought against Fox, as well as in a suit brought by a former Carlson producer, Abby Grossberg, alleging a hostile and discriminatory work environment.

All this was in the mix when the network finally cut Mr. Carlson’s program this week, according to several people familiar with the internal discussions. And, the end of his run followed a pattern.

His unceremonious departure made Mr. Carlson the latest in a list of prominent hosts and executives Fox has decided to show the door once the Murdochs concluded they were no longer worth the trouble: Glenn Beck (2011), Sarah Palin (2013), Roger Ailes, the network’s co-founder (2016) and Bill O’Reilly (2017).

Despite the political clout he could exercise and the money his top-rated show brought in for the network, ultimately, Mr. Carlson learned that he served at the pleasure of the Murdochs.

Their decision in the end was as swift and unsentimental as the two-paragraph statement the network sent in announcing his dismissal: “We thank him for his service.”

So the redacted messages from Tucker are bad enough that Fox quickly fires him over them. I can't imagine how bad they must be.

[Elfdart]

"If Fox can write off the full settlement payment to Dominion, it could amount to an estimated $213 million in tax savings for the company."

Fox Can Claim Tax Writeoff For Defamation Settlement

Fox’s massive settlement with private equity-backed voting machine company Dominion Voting Systems didn’t just spare the conservative news organization from a lengthy public defamation trial or a full public reckoning for its election lies — it could also mean a tax break as large as $213 million, according to a Lever review.

On Tuesday, Fox News and its parent company Fox Corporation agreed to pay a $787 million settlement to Dominion, the largest-known media defamation payout in U.S. history, concluding two years of litigation over the news network’s false claims that the 2020 election was rigged.

Thanks to an arcane line in the tax code, Fox can deduct that settlement payment from its income taxes, according to a company spokesperson and tax experts consulted by The Lever. That’s because federal law allows taxpayers to write off many legal costs, providing that they are “ordinary and necessary” business expenses. The IRS has repeatedly affirmed that for major corporations, paying out settlements is just part of the cost of doing business.

The ghost of Clark Clifford is rattling his chains like Jacob Marley. Clifford, as attorney for General Electric in the early 1960s, not only haggled a sweet settlement with the Justice Department where they only had to pay $7 million instead of $70 million in fines, but also convinced the IRS and the courts to let G.E. claim the bribes and legal fees as business expenses -and write off tax liability accordingly.

[bilateralrope]

Fox News’s ‘vitriolic lies’ threaten democracy, says disinformation expert suing channel

Exclusive: Nina Jankowicz, who is suing over campaign of falsehoods, says ‘if Fox isn’t brought to account, it will not stop’

Ed Pilkington in New York
@edpilkington
Sat 20 May 2023 00.51 BST

The woman suing Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News for defamation in the wake of the $787m settlement with the voting machine company Dominion has accused the media giant of waging a campaign of “vitriolic lies” against her that amounts to a threat to democracy.

Nina Jankowicz sued Fox News and its parent company Fox Corporation for allegedly damaging her reputation as a specialist in conspiracy theories and disinformation campaigns. The lawsuit was lodged in a Delaware state court exactly a year after she resigned as executive director of a new Department of Homeland Security unit combatting online disinformation.

The Disinformation Governance Board was abruptly shut down in the wake of a storm of virulent rightwing criticism, allegedly fueled by Fox News. Jankowicz and the new DHS division she led were attacked as being part of a conspiracy to censor rightwing comment spearheaded by Joe Biden.

Jankowicz resigned from the federal post on 18 May 2022, barely three weeks into the job.

In an interview with the Guardian, she said her motive in suing Fox was to ensure accountability for what she alleged was a campaign of lies against her that undermined American democracy. “There needs to be consequences,” she said.

“It was lies, very personal and very vitriolic lies. And I don’t think that is democratic.”

She added that what she claimed was Fox’s reckless disregard for the truth had implications for the future of the country. “If we can’t agree on statements of fact, how can you live in a democracy?”

Jankowicz was announced as the head of the new disinformation board on 27 April last year and was instantly engulfed in a tempest of rightwing anger. In the lawsuit, Jankowicz’s lawyers allege that the attacks skyrocketed the following day, after Fox News hosts began fuelling the hatred with unfounded claims about her desire to censor rightwing voices.

One of the most vociferous critics, the complaint says, was Tucker Carlson, the news channel’s then primetime star who was fired by Fox last month in the wake of the Dominion settlement. In his opening monologue on 28 April, Carlson called Jankowicz a “moron”, said that what she was doing amounted to a “full-scale attack on free speech” and dubbed the disinformation board “the new Soviet America”.

Other Fox hosts, including Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity, followed suit, labelling her a “useful idiot”, “janko-half-witz” and “insane”. Hannity went so far as to depict her as “one of the biggest perpetrators and purveyors of disinformation in the entire country”.

The Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade wondered why President Biden would give a pregnant woman such an “important job” – Jankowicz was eight months pregnant at the time.

“I was weeks away from giving birth to my first kid when this was all happening,” Jankowicz told the Guardian. “That’s a time I will never get back.”

The attacks continued long after she had resigned her federal position. As recently as last month, Ingraham returned to the fray; the Fox News host played a clip of Jankowicz describing the harassment she had endured and commented: “She’s just upset that she didn’t get to censor everybody”.

As an authority on disinformation campaigns, Jankowicz said she could predict the cycle of events that unfolded. Whenever Fox hosts attacked her on air, a swarm of online hate would be directed at her culminating in multiple death threats.

“Every time they talked about me on Fox, a new wave of harassment would start. I would get a spike especially when Carlson and Hannity mentioned me.”

Many of the Fox attacks made a point of her gender, she said. “They were focused on belittling me, cutting me down to size – disregarding my serious work and the fact that I had been called as a Republican witness in Senate hearings – just to make me look like a silly little girl.”

The new lawsuit adds to several legal actions piling up on Fox’s plate.

In addition to Dominion’s $1.6bn suit, which alleged Fox had spread the lie that its voting machines helped steal the 2020 presidential election from Donald Trump, the media company is facing a separate action brought by another voting machine firm, Smartmatic.

Carlson’s former booker, Abby Grossberg, is also suing Fox alleging its one-time star fostered an abusive workplace culture.

Jankowicz faces a daunting mountain to climb in taking on the Murdoch empire. As a public figure holding an important federal role at the time of the alleged defamation, she must clear a very high legal standard.

She must show that the broadcaster acted with “actual malice” in disseminating false statements about her that it knew were untrue, or that it showed “reckless disregard” in airing those statements without checking their veracity.

The complaint claims that the channel mentioned more than 150 times that Jankowicz intended to monitor and censor free speech. In fact, the disinformation board had no powers to censor or surveil anyone, it was merely designed to co-ordinate the efforts of other government entities.

“They depicted me as a fascist who didn’t stand up for free speech, when precisely standing up for free speech had been the purpose of my entire career,” she said.

The lawsuit also points to Fox hosts saying she was fired from the board when she in fact resigned.

The Guardian invited Fox to respond to the claim that it knowingly or recklessly broadcast untruths about Jankowicz. A Fox spokesperson said the company has moved to have the case relocated from the Delaware state court to a federal court, but did not respond to any of the specific allegations.

Jankowicz is bringing the action with the help of a gofundme page which has so far raised almost $60,000 towards her legal fees. She said she was heartened by that support, but stressed that money was not her motive.

“I’ve been cautioned time and time again that this might not be ‘worth it’ financially,” she said. “That’s not why I’m pursuing this.”

Her aim she said was partly to show that individuals could also confront the powerful, not just businesses like Dominion and Smartmatic. “These companies have venture capital firms behind them, they can afford fancy lawyers and years-long trials to hold Fox to account. For individuals like me, it’s much harder – and I don’t believe that is something that our system can sustain.”

By bringing the lawsuit, she runs the risk of potentially opening herself up to a renewed wave of criticism that she is attempting to limit free speech protected under the first amendment. The Guardian asked her whether suing for defamation was the best way to counter Fox’s alleged disinformation.

Jankowicz stressed that she didn’t pursue the lawsuit lightly. “I don’t think anybody should pursue a lawsuit just because someone said something mean about them – I have a thick skin. But I believe Fox’s continued lies about individuals are a greater threat to free speech and democracy than a carefully considered, narrow lawsuit like mine.”

She said her main aim was to force Fox to answer for what she called its false statements of facts. “That sort of coverage is not protected speech,” she said. “If Fox isn’t brought to account, they will not stop.”

Hopefully these lawsuits over Fox's lies keep coming until the lies stop. Even if that takes bankruptcy.