Digest-Chella 04/20/2023

Daniel Spielberger puts on his legal cap and unpacks Fox News' Settlement with Dominion Voting Systems.

THE MEDIA CLASSIFIED ADS

>>The Classified Ads are taking a break for March and April. When we return, you’ll be able to place your Ad in our two weekly newsletters: Thursday’s Opportunities and our Digest. We also offer add-on placement for Slack and Listserv posts. Want to promote your job opening / pitch call / new project / ecommerce brand? Click through for rates, testimonials, and to get in touch. <<

---

Study Hall Goes To Law School

Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News is basically the Gwyneth Paltrow ski crash trial for people who know what a lede is. Of course, the stakes of the “media trial of the century” were arguably higher than a beginner’s slope at a fancy resort in Utah. After Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election and falsely claimed the election was rigged, Fox News repeatedly featured multiple guests on air who spread the Trump campaign’s unfounded conspiracies that Dominion machines were manipulated to flip the vote in Joe Biden’s favor. The election technology company filed the defamation lawsuit in 2021. 

Leading up to the highly anticipated trial, Dominion released evidence of Fox News personalities and reporters, including Tucker Carlson, internally acknowledging that claims made on-air by attorneys Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani — both of whom attempted to overturn the 2020 election results — were in fact unreliable. But anyone who was yearning for Rupert Murdoch’s witness stand swag will be sorely disappointed. What would he even wear? An Adidas tracksuit? On Tuesday afternoon, Fox News agreed to pay $787.5 million and avoided a legal showdown, which is probably best for the network; however, the rest of us missed out on an opportunity to see some of the worst people in TV news held to account for the malicious lies they helped spread. 

Smartmatic, another voting technology company, will still pursue a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News, alleging that the network broadcasted more than 100 false statements about the company. 

“Most defamation lawsuits are BS,” Susan Seager, an adjunct professor of law, and head of the Press Freedom and Transparency practice at UC Irvine’s Intellectual Property, Arts and Technology Clinic told Study Hall. “They’re mainly brought by people who have thin skins and they hope that they can silence the press by suing the press. But most defamation lawsuits don’t have any validity. This one seems to have a lot of legs,” she said of Dominion’s now-settled lawsuit. 

At the heart of this case is the question of whether there is enough evidence to prove that Fox News staff aired false claims about Dominion with malice and internal acknowledgment that what was being presented on air wasn’t true. Whether that would have been proven in a court of law, however, is now moot. Seager said it would have been “very risky” for Fox News to have its stars take the stand. 

For the rest of us, she said, this case just reaffirms the obvious need for fact-checking.  

“I don’t think it’s really going to change the media because most reporters check their sources anyway,” Seager said. “Maybe you’re going to put someone on who has a theory, but you’re not going to do it over and over again if everything they say has been proven to be false, and they have no evidence, and they admit they have no evidence.”Fox News will now have to pay a hefty sum for spreading misinformation, but besides issuing a statement acknowledging “the Court’s rulings” that some claims about Dominion were “false,” it won’t have to air an official apology or retractions, and its on-air stars and CEO won’t undergo cross-examination. (The network’s statement added that the settlement “reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards.” Well, that’s reassuring!) As ProPublica reporter Andy Kroll noted in a Twitter thread, millions of Fox News viewers will continue living in an alternate reality where the 2020 election was stolen and Tucker Carlson is a credible purveyor of truth.

---

NPR, PBS, and CBC Say “Au Revoir” To Twitter… Now, Will You?

Ever since Elon Musk took over Twitter, many of us have reckoned with whether or not we should even use the decaying website — for the lolz, self-promotion, or tea — that’s become increasingly hostile to digital newsrooms. Last week, Azealia Banks’ long-time nemesis escalated his vendetta against journalists, when Twitter falsely began labeling NPR’s social accounts as “state-affiliated media,” a label that was once solely applied to outlets that produced editorial content controlled by the government. Though Twitter switched the label to “government-funded media,” this didn’t resolve the kerfuffle.  

NPR called the characterization “inaccurate and misleading, given that NPR is a private, nonprofit company with editorial independence” and added that it “receives less than 1 percent of its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.” 

After NPR went dark across its 52 Twitter accounts, PBS and CBC, a Canadian public broadcaster, followed suit when Twitter slapped the same label on their accounts. In turn, Musk doubled down and added the description to other global news outlets’ bios. Will media companies stop making content for a megalomaniac CEO who is constantly trolling them? 

Some newsrooms might consider jumping ship for financial reasons. As NBC News reporter Kevin Collier pointed out in a tweet, Twitter isn’t even a reliable way of accruing traffic. Now that Twitter is vying to be Truth Social’s more obnoxious older brother, newsrooms could move on to greener pastures, like, say, live-streaming the laborious creation of a Google Doc on TikTok. Perhaps it will take more tumult to start a mass exodus. 

Wolfgang Ruth, Vulture’s senior social media manager who authored a viral tweet about Vanessa Hudgens, believes that the platform still matters for “brand visibility.” He told Study Hall that he doesn’t necessarily measure the success of his work by traffic. Instead, he aims to establish Vulture’s account as a unique voice on the site. 

“[Twitter] is important to us because it’s where we express ourselves the most and where we engage with our followers and where followers know to engage with us, especially during live events,” he said. 

Ruth cited how Vulture’s thread covering Paltrow’s aforementioned ski accident courtroom drama went viral, turning it into a “pop culture moment” rather than just another trial. As of now, he doesn’t see a viable replacement to the platform, especially since Twitter is where people go to immediately complain about a live reality TV reunion being delayed or post Oscars hot takes. Ruth added that social media discourse that disregards its influence by pointing solely to whether or not it drives traffic is reductive. 

“Twitter’s a very specific platform and for some people, including me, that’s a job,” he said. “I think it’s still a great place to use voice and experiment and really have fun with it.” 

“I’ll be running [the account] until Twitter isn’t accessible anymore,” he said. 

As Musk continues to add a myriad of unnecessary features (who ever asked for bookmarks to be visible? How is this new verification system even going to work? And why does my “For You” timeline repeatedly show the same news about a “Twilight” reboot over and over again?), the site may gradually become so unusable that we will have to leave. But for now, an alluring alternative for churning out takes is yet to come to fruition. 

---

BREAKING NEWS

BuzzFeed News is shutting down, the company’s co-founder and CEO, Jonah Peretti said in a memo. Layoffs will begin across nearly every division of the company as it plans to cut 15% of the workforce. HuffPost and BuzzFeed.com will open a number of roles for current BuzzFeed News employees, and the company will exist as a “single news brand in HuffPost, which is profitable,” according to Peretti. Back when I was just starting my media career (lol) in 2015, an early mentor told me I should be excited, that BuzzFeed News is the future of digital media… In that case, I’ve never been more worried than I am now. —Erin Corbett

---

LONGREAD OF THE WEEK

For The New Republic, Aaron Timms writes a very prescient (and scathing) book review of “Traffic,” former BuzzFeed News editor Ben Smith’s account of the company’s origins and how it allegedly transformed digital media into a rat race for clicks. The essay, which thoroughly skewers the soulless suits still trying to squeeze a penny out of mindless content, features a hilarious mock listicle, “10 SIGNS YOU’RE SO THE BOOK TRAFFIC BY BEN SMITH.” My favorite is #4: “You never miss an opportunity to remind us that you, Ben Smith, are a devoted father to young children. (“I was reading a fairy tale to my young son when I realized what was happening.”).” Ouch! 

---

COMINGS & GOINGS

—Michael Reilly is joining The Markup as managing editor. He was previously the executive editor at MIT Technology Review.
—Hayden Field is leaving her role as a tech and investigative reporter at Morning Brew. She will be joining CNBC as a tech reporter.
—Maryam Saleh is leaving Reveal to return to The Intercept as senior editor. 

---

EVERYTHING ELSE

Earlier this week, the Writers Guild Of America authorized a strike with 97.85% of members voting in favor of taking collective action when their contract expires on May 1. A strike would halt production on many films and TV shows. “Our membership has spoken. You have expressed your collective strength, solidarity and the demand for meaningful change in overwhelming numbers,” the Guild said in an email to members. “Armed with this demonstration of unity and resolve, we will continue to work at the negotiating table to achieve a fair contract for all writers.” Contract negotiations are expected to continue this week; however, little progress has been made on key issues so far. Solidarity with our Hollywood colleagues!