For quite a while, I've been debunking the myth the FOX News went to court in Florida to assert a "right to lie" in their newscasts, and that they were successful in getting the court to recognize such a right. Usually I've simply cut and pasted from the actual decision, which shows the court accepted no such argument, merely dismissing a claim by a reporter based on a decision that the Federal Communications Commission's policy against lying or distorting the news was not covered by Florida's own "whistleblower protection" law.
This, however, proved to be a bit cumbersome and long, resulting in comment postings of several paragraphs minimum. At the suggestion of KingOneEye, I've instead put together a rather lengthy blog post over at the site of the Center for Competitive Politics that I can in the future simply link to whenever this particular myth pops up here. My research thoroughly refutes the myth that FOX News (or their affiliate) went into court and asserted a "right to lie," relying on the actual court filings, court decisions, filings with and decisions of the Federal Communications Commission, and the web site put together by the two journalists at the center of the case in question, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson.
I've excerpted the post below with a few highlights, for the full post you can go to: FOX, Lies & Videotape: debunking an internet myth
...the story that FOX News got a court ruling in favor of its right to "lie" in its news broadcasts has become something of a talking point among the cable news channel’s detractors. There’s only one problem – the story as popularly told is completely false, and is based almost exclusively on hysteria, hyperbole, and half-truths...
To begin with, the popular portrayal almost always omits the rather crucial fact that Akre and Wilson lost almost every one of their claims at the trial court. As the Florida Second District Court of Appeal noted in their ruling:
Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging... that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT’s attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre’s claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC...
More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of whether WTVT actually asserted a"right to lie"in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court...
It is clear from the evidence presented here that FOX did not argue, as claimed by several of its critics, that it had a First Amendment to lie in its news reports. It’s also plain that the Florida courts did not rule that FOX and other broadcasters had such a right...
Whatever one may think of FOX News and their coverage, this should hopefully put to rest the claim that they went to court to "protect their right to lie." Hopefully future discussions of FOX News can proceed without relying on this now-thoroughly-discredited internet myth.
Sean Parnell
President
Center for Competitive Politics