John Stossel writes a lot about the First Amendment, but he claims in this lawsuit that there is no First Amendment right to fact check his work.
/1
s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2106…
/1
s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2106…
https://twitter.com/JohnStossel/status/1445771388707434499
Look at the sneering language with which he describes the notion of "fact-checking" with "impunity" as a "masquerade."
Not far from something you'd see on the North Korean twitter account. /2
Not far from something you'd see on the North Korean twitter account. /2
Stossel did a video about forest fires. Facebook says it lacked context, and directed viewers to a website that disagreed with Stossel's assessment.
That's literally the defamation here. /3
That's literally the defamation here. /3
Then, Stossel says that, because his reporting suggested both land management and climate change were to blame--an assessment the page you're directed to shares--it was defamatory to say his video lacked context. /4
The problem with Stossel's lawsuit is that Facebook is allowed to have opinions, like all of us. And factually proving that a claim is not "misleading" seems like a difficult task.
Stossel basically admits the term is meaningless in his own lawsuit.
/5
Stossel basically admits the term is meaningless in his own lawsuit.
/5
Under the First Amendment, I can say that John Stossel has a done a lot of great reporting in the course of his life.
Or I can say his reporting often lacks context. And both opinions are protected. /6
Or I can say his reporting often lacks context. And both opinions are protected. /6
On another occasion, Facebook labeled one of Stossel's videos as "false" without specifying what was false about it, apparently.
Saying you disagree with his conclusion isn't 1a protected? /7
Saying you disagree with his conclusion isn't 1a protected? /7
So Stossel is suing Facebook and an organization who Facebook seeks out for its opinions for defaming him by claiming his videos lack context and... I guess implying he undersold climate change?
He's asking for punitive damages.
/8
He's asking for punitive damages.
/8
The thing is, I generally like John Stossel. I think he's got an interesting perspective, he's fun to listen to, and he often interviews interesting people.
And he needs to make a living. And Facebook is making that harder.
But hoo boy is a lawsuit ever counterproductive.
/9
And he needs to make a living. And Facebook is making that harder.
But hoo boy is a lawsuit ever counterproductive.
/9
It's my sincere hope that the case will be dismissed in response to an anti-SLAPP, and Stossel will get the chance to think about whether this attempt to silence criticism of his work is really in accordance with his free speech principles. Pobody's nerfect. /f
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
