why did the Fox news channel sue for the right to lie?

Question

Jane Akre and her husband Steve Wilson are former employees of Fox owned-and-operated station WTVT in Tampa, Florida. In 1997, they were fired from the station after refusing to knowingly include false information in their report concerning the Monsanto Company's production of RBGH, a drug designed to make cows produce more milk. They successfully sued under Florida's whistle blower law and were awarded a US $425,000 settlement by jury decision. However, Fox appealed to an appellate court and won, after the court declared that the FCC policy against falsification that Fox violated was just a policy and not a "law, rule, or regulation", and so the whistle blower law did not apply.

The court agreed with WTVT's (Fox) argument "that the FCC's policy against the intentional falsification of the news -- which the FCC has called its "news distortion policy" -- does not qualify as the required "law, rule, or regulation" under section 448.102.[...] Because the FCC's news distortion policy is not a "law, rule, or regulation" under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute."[1]

In 2001, Jane Akre and her husband won the Goldman Environmental Prize as a recognition for their report on RBGH. [2]

In 2004, Fox filed a US$1.7 million counter-suit against Akre and Wilson for trial fees and costs. Akre and Wilson both appear in a major portion of the 2004/5 critical documentary, The Corporation.

In 2007 Jane became the editor-in-chief of the national news desk at InjuryBoard.com.[3

when you watch the news don't you want honesty and integrity?

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

I made a suggestion for the other person who asked this question a day or so ago that the two reporters, Akre and Wilson, should appeal the overturn making use of the word "news" instead of "media" and have their attorneys do research on several fronts:  (a) other news anchors (Dan Rather, for example) or journalists who have been fired over inaccuracies; (b) the "mission statement" (if any) that was filed with the FCC or other federal agencies when Rupert Murdoch (not a U.S. citizen at the time) took over an American television station---I believe foreign ownership of banks (BCCI scandal) and also U.S. television stations was illegal at the time (during Reagan/Bush years) although later changed; (c) see if at its inception or in any statement of purpose to anyone, FOX News or Rupert Murdoch used any word  like "trust" or "accurate" to describe just the news (not the media aspect), because if so they are in breach of contract (the contract being their guarantee of "accuracy" or reportings the public could "trust"  in their firing of the reporters.  Also, I'd consider filing a lawsuit against Monsanto, because in one of the websites mtnglo, a responder, listed, FOX News testified that Monsanto had "pressured them" to either lie or misrepresent... which is collusion and coercion that resulted in job loss plus damages for Akres and Wilson.  I said this with more clarity on the other question (in case you want to check my answers).  

A producer-director named Robert Greenwald has done a short documentary on FOX News entitled "OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism" that is available on-line.  One of the websites is www.outfoxed.com.  Note in these series of video clips, FOX consistently uses "fair and balanced" to describe the reporting.

Deerinthefield · Answer

I don't think ANY news station offers integrity. I think they all stretch the truth, or alter the truth, or hid other facts from the truth. It's just the way it is, unfortunately, I hope one day, everyone can be honest with each other.

Anonymous · Answer

The first time I heard the Fox News vs WWE comparison, I was surprised, but it becomes more and more valid every day.

Anonymous · Answer

The Illuminati owns all news

Rhinehold · Answer

Looking up the actual caselaw will show that this 'question' is an entirely complete fabrication.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1310807.html

Anonymous · Answer

you typed alot of if and buts but failed to give a fact that fox was wrong. didn;t you say they sued and won.  and my would you loved to pin fox because it is the only station that doesn;t kiss barry azz all the time'
yes i want some honesty that:s why fox is the only one i watch. you sure don;t get it from thrills up and down my legs  and the jerk olberman.
msnbc does nothing but lie.that;s why i stopped watching them.

Jimbo · Answer

That DAMNED GEORGE BUSH!  He did it again.  I knew he was up to something in Tampa, Fla..  I'm glad he got caught at it again.  Hehehehehe!

prusa1237 · Answer

Honesty and integrity where?  MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, NPR?
At least FOX offers coverage these light weights neglect to shed light on.

2HOT4U · Answer

um... old news is old news.  Why did you bring up an event that happened two+ years ago like it was new.

Anonymous · Answer

It's a basic part of their business plan.

Trending News

why did the Fox news channel sue for the right to lie?

18 Answers