Should we sue Fox and as for injunction?

[Matt Collins]

Should we or HQ sue Fox news and attempt to get an injunction issued against Fox?

Yes I realize that FOX is private and they can choose to invite whoever they want, however, I think a case might could maybe be made (although it would be a stretch) that given the gravity of the situation that the result of this event can have a direct effect on the outcome of our democratic process.

Granted I dont want the government intrusion (gov doesn't have a right to tell a company what they can and cannot do), however getting an injunction against FOX could be beneficial in drawing other media attention and perhaps stopping FOX from going forward with this.

If nothing else, it could stir up the hornets nest a bit? Perhaps there would be a sympathetic judge in NH somewhere?

 

[freelance]

You'll have to search the forum, but the FCC responded to an e-mail from someone on here and said that what FOX is doing is legal.

 

[next]

Besides being completely against the concept of free markets and private property, the legal theory is probably frivolous enough to warrant judicial sanctions for even filing the suit. By even asking the government to intervene you are going against everything this movement is supposed to stand for.

 

[azminuteman]

An argument can be made that with the responsibility of projecting a message across the airwaves, they shouldn't be allowed to 'shape' the news.

However,

Last night on Headline News, the Glenn Beck / Ron Paul hour was on for a 3rd night (that I am aware of and kudos to CNN for keeping the better part of the deal on their word) and their ratings said that for the last quarter, HNN was the highest rated news program on cable and beat not just O'Reilly/H&C but Fox News as a whole.

 

[Matt Collins]

Well, I don't specifically care if we win (I don't want to set bad precedent really), but an injunction would be interesting to stir the hornet's nest.

 

[jmdrake]

This really shows how ridiculous campaign finance laws are. The feds are SOOOO concerned about individuals giving more than $2,300 and yet big corporations are allowed to manipulate elections by who they invite. How much free publicity is a selective invitation to debate? While I'm not sure of the lawsuit this really should be worthy of legislation.

Also there is another angle, that of "anti trust". In order to participate in the "official" debates candidates have to agree NOT to participate in "unofficial" debates. Perhaps that's the best angle?

Anyway, we need to embarrass Fox News by having a good showing in Iowa.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[diggronpaul]

John,

File the damn suit if you want, forget what others say. This is the beauty of being an individual, you can do what you want and be unpopular.

You might want to use registered NH voters as plaintiffs, as they can argue that their ability to collect information about the candidates is being obstructure by a major element of media, whose access to PUBLIC airways was granted, in part, in exchange for responsible reporting to the public that OWN these airways.

I think the injunction has a shot, depending on the judge. If it doesn't work, well then there will still be media coverage of this lawsuit, which I believe will help show the media system for what it really is.

Go for it !!!!

 

[Matt Collins]

Are they any attorneys out there that can comment on this?

 

[malibu]

You'll have to search the forum, but the FCC responded to an e-mail from someone on here and said that what FOX is doing is legal.

maybe Faux Noise is barely in compliance with the letter of election law -
but not the spirit and intent to hold free and open elections, including primary elections.

And if we find any NH GOP collusion - and I've read Fergus Cullen's statement on Monday -
the Republican Party of NH will be sorry.

I suggest we textmsg-bomb the Fox switchboards during any post event textpolling on Sunday night.

 

[fuzzybekool]

"Media has a monopoly as was recognized by congress when creating public access television. Media thusly has a public trust that cannot be lawfully violated in any way without creating liability. Media monopolies controlling information to masses of people have an immense public trust. They hold the peoples lives in every respect in a day to day way and cannot exploit the people for the profit of special interests without damaging the people. The peoples minds are controlled by the information they receive. This is logical and irrefutable."

This quote is from a proposed lawsuit someone it looks like tried to pursue.
link : http://algoxy.com/poly/media_lawsuit.html