Skip to content

Fox News settles with Dominion

Fox News settled the Dominion lawsuit today for $787 million. Depending on how you look at it, that represents about half a year's profits or 20% of their current cash stockpile. Not a back breaker, but not a trivial hit either. Here's how the market responded:

That is one big nothingburger. Apparently investors have decided this has no material effect on Fox at all.

I have nothing interesting to say about this except that I'm going to miss the show. I don't blame Dominion for settling, but I was looking forward to the media circus that would have surrounded a trial.

BY THE WAY: Fox's only public statement so far is that the settlement "reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards." You betcha.

63 thoughts on “Fox News settles with Dominion

  1. Traveller

    It is a Higher Number Than I Expected ($787.5m):

    ....were I Fox, I probably would have rolled the dice and gone to trial....the problem is that Fox may have been utterly destroyed, (a societal good), but now may continue and most importantly can negotiate the carriage fees coming up in May (?)...

    So Fox survives...

    I was glad to hear that Dominion's trials are not done...Rudy Giuliani and Sydney Powell are apparently next up...and if so, I would expect bankruptcy filings from both of these attorney's.

    Traveller

    PS What remains interesting is that it is apparently still true that anyone that goes near Mr Trump will be utterly destroyed.......I probably expect a DOJ filing against Attorney Christina Bobb also. Sigh

    And a quick additional note...on CNN I have just seen Trump campaign ads...lol

    1. kahner

      yeah, fox, it's execs, board and hosts were clearly all very scared of the impact of trial evidence and testimony to pay that much to settle. and considering all the stuff that's already come out and how ridiculous it was, i'm real disappointed dominion didn't roll the dice. but i think they would have gotten less even if they won in court than they did in this settlement and with appeals i imagine it could have taken years. so fox i'd say paid out to avoid the trial, not because of they were worried about paying more if they lost.

    2. Eve

      Google paid 99 dollars an hour on the internet. Everything I did was basic Οnline w0rk from comfort at hΟme for 5-7 hours per day that I g0t from this office I f0und over the web and they paid me 100 dollars each hour. For more details
      visit this article... https://createmaxwealth.blogspot.com

    3. Jasper_in_Boston

      There is no scenario under which Fox News could’ve been destroyed. That was not remotely on the table.

      1. kahner

        Not destroyed, but I think badly hurt by the trial. Imagine Tucker on the stand having to answer questions about calling his audience and trump fucking idiots and assholes. And presumably they thought the same, based on the side of this settlement. I also saw today "The terms of the agreement, which was abruptly announced just before lawyers were expected to make opening statements, did not require Fox to apologize for any wrongdoing in its own programming — a point that Dominion was said to have been pressing for." So they were willing to pay out 787 million bucks but not admit their lies to their audience. They know they're in a precarious position and OAN and other competitors are a threat.

        1. Jasper_in_Boston

          Color me maximally skeptical they could have been "badly" hurt, either. Do people really think firms selling laxatives and reverse mortgages would've pulled their ads? Maybe! But I personally deem it unlikely their business would have been devastated.. Also, Fox News viewers not only don't mind being lied to, they often demand lies, and get quite angry when they're told the truth. Murdoch's a very rich guy. Settling was prudent, good business.

  2. Heysus

    I'm rather sorry they settled. It would have been most interesting to see the "faux fools" back tracking on all that they have said. They would all likely trip over their own tongues. They would definitely have proven that they were all liars. Better for Murdoch to pay the price for lying. It would have been fun...

    1. zic

      Additionally, Fox faces other suits from Dominion, these against individual broadcasters, and they go into those trials with admissions of lies as a foundational fact.

  3. cld

    It seems like a capitulation for Dominion considering the significant position they were said to be in going into the trial.

    Fox doesn't even need to apologize? It would be interesting to find out how much more there is to the settlement than has been made public, but the public face of it seems like the best outcome Fox could have dreamed of.

          1. cld

            Politically they'll be still able to present themselves with the veneer of being a news organization, which would have been seriously compromised by a trial, is really my disappointment.

            1. Lounsbury

              That is nonsense. A trial would never move their core audience. It's pure political cat-nip for you but only pure risk for Dominion.

              1. cld

                The core audience isn't the point, there are still a huge number of people, not just MAGA, who legitimately think they present a reasonable perspective.

                Undermining that credibility would present a significant value.

                1. Lounsbury

                  Politics.

                  Dominion is not a political party, it's a company.

                  And the information has already been - sans rebuttals - in the press, so you're dreaming if you think this would have materially changed anything.

                2. Jasper_in_Boston

                  there are still a huge number of people, not just MAGA, who legitimately think they present a reasonable perspective.

                  No there aren't. Everyone known they're MAGA shills. Even most of their right wing viewers know this. Indeed the dependability of Fox News's political slant is what keeps the viewers coming back.

                  1. cld

                    Most of their viewers might know this, in an abstract sense, but they still think it's technically definable as news.

                    Lose the news tag and it just becomes a talk show, blathering, opinion, aesthetics, the Home Shopping Network.

                    [second attempt to post this which seems to vanish, sorry if it ends up appearing twice]

                    1. Lounsbury

                      You can more profitably fantasize about a Messiah converting the MAGA to your Lefty political religion, that would be as founded in reality and make a more entertaining story

                    2. cld

                      No, you misunderstand, the banal and dull are actually banal and dull first, MAGA second.

                      When MAGA starts getting too violent and nuts around half the people who vote for Republicans will start thinking twice about it, many of them thinking twice pretty hard.

                      I don't think you could get that many to vote for most Democrats, but a lot of them could just stay home, and that is a very plausible outcome.

            2. Mitch Guthman

              The satisfaction of people like us isn’t worth an immense amount of money to the businessmen who essentially bought Dominion’s claim. It’s highly unlikely that a jury would’ve awarded them anything remotely in the neighborhood of a billion dollars and, in any case, it would’ve taken years and years to collect. Settling was the percentage move.

              1. cld

                I saw the judge was disallowing any reference to January 6, but everyone on the jury would know it happened anyway.

                I think they would invariably have ended up concluding Fox was the key element in legitimizing the delusion that brought that about, and what would be the real fine for that?

                1. Mitch Guthman

                  That’s true but it doesn’t translate into damages and it doesn’t mean that Dominion won’t need to spend years in appeals and millions more in legal fees to collect whatever they win at trial. This lawsuit was a business proposition for Dominion and it makes sense that they’re maximizing the money instead of maximizing Fox’s pain.

                  1. Lounsbury

                    Notably since playing Don Quixote against Fox deep pockets in an endless appeals process also meant maximising Dominion's own financial pain and risk as Dominion's lawyers were not free.

        1. kahner

          My point being, what other people want usually becomes irrelevant in the face of that much money. Particularly to a corporation.

    1. Lounsbury

      Hardly a "capitulation" - they get confirmed payout now, paying their lawyers significant legal bills and taking home cash compensation.

      Their interest is their business, not your politics or political agenda.

      Going to trial is high risk.

      They brought enough ammunition into public domain to continue legal ammunition for other suits.

      1. Lounsbury

        Of course you're not alone in an ill-informed political whinging on from fantastists on the Left who mistook a civil defamation lawsuit between private businesses as some kind of Advocacy engagement , but that's rather uninteresting and unremarkable.

  4. Traveller

    Trust me, Trials, even under the best of circumstances, are crap shoots....and Dominion had a high mountain to climb...sometimes you have to take the money.

    Also, Dominion has been purchased by a hedge fund who financed this litigation while the original owners maintained a 25% stake in the company...or that is my understanding.

    No one is happy with the settlement...but it was the smart road for Dominion to take. (remember the Maximum value of Dominion as an ongoing company was only $80m...the settlement number is very good, imo) Traveller

    1. Lounsbury

      Private Equity fund, not a hedge fund, PE: Staple Street, middle market growth capital focus: https://staplestreetcapital.com/ - they investedUS$38mln in 2018 (emphasis, 2018) for 76%odd of overall firm on a growth play.

      Net legal fees this somewhat compensates for probably 5-7 years of lost potential growth.

  5. bebopman

    “ Fox's only public statement so far is that the settlement "reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards." ”

    So Faux Newz is committed to ProPublica? Nice of them.

  6. skeptonomist

    Juries are made up of citizens and 47% of citizens eligible voted for Trump in 2020. Not all of them buy the Trump/Fox election claim, but it's still a large fraction.

    Could anybody who watches Fox be disqualified from a jury? How about if they watch MSNBC, or even CBS news? Even if a unanimous verdict is not required, there is no reason to assume that a jury would reach a rational, unbiased verdict.

    Of course in a criminal trial - of Trump or anyone - a unanimous vote for a guilty verdict is required in most places. Trying political figures or actually any well-known figures is not the same as trying any random accused criminal.

  7. painedumonde

    Which Justice™ system - oh the one that just keeps the whales comfortable. Meanwhile, the plebes stream into incarceration for smoking the doobie. All by design.

    1. Lounsbury

      Civil suit between private parties, not criminal law, nor even a government action in civil law. Incarceration is literally another subject.

  8. lawnorder

    I suspect that it's not so much that investors think it's a nothingburger as that investors priced an award or settlement this size or larger into Fox's stock price months ago.

  9. Displaced Canuck

    Regarding the lack of reaction of the share price, it just means the settlement price was close to expectations. There was probably some relief in the market that the trial isn't going to happen, it hates uncertianty more than anything.

    Too bad though, I would have loved to see Rupert Murdoch in the witness box.

  10. Laertes

    I'm surprised the stock didn't pop. I'd have supposed that a much bigger hit than $788M had already been priced in. Today was a good day for FOX shareholders.

    1. Lounsbury

      No, rather given the financial valuations on hand for Dominion, the betting would more rationally be at around or lower damages as end-result.

  11. D_Ohrk_E1

    With $4B in cash, Fox News had to settle and the number is not insignificant.

    Combined with Smartmatic's lawsuit, Fox News was on the hook for $3B. IDK how the other, more recent lawsuits from two individuals will go, but Fox News is also facing a likely shareholder lawsuit.

    Since the initial filing of its lawsuit, Fox News has lost roughly 25% of its stock price, underperforming the Dow composite, S&P 500, and NASDAQ composite. With 237M shares outstanding, Fox shareholders lost over $2B combined since Dominion's lawsuit filing.

    The final straw was the admission that Rupert had a role that Fox News tried to cover up and withheld evidence related to Rupert's role.

    The Dominion settlement was just the start. Fox News might wipe out all of its cash by the end of the year. No stock buybacks this year, folks!

    1. Lounsbury

      Very good point in re the shareholder lawsuits - notably also at Fox Corporation level as an ultimate beneficial owner of Fox News. Allowing so much loss of shareholder value over the past months is not trivial, and ex-politics, clearly something activist major shareholders would potentially sue over.

      With the added legal exposure for Smartmatic (which obviously the bet now will be a chunky settlement of similar magnitude) plus the discrimination suits that are cross-reinforcing on the disclosures...

    2. Lounsbury

      However on cash, the 4bln is Fox Corp, the upper tier parent that is entertainment etc., not directly fungible, and Fox Corp shareholders can not be happy the annoying risk from Fox News subsidiary, being neither as profitable nor as safe, is directly hitting them.

  12. Dana Decker

    Right now, red states and counties are hostile to Dominion. Not much business there, if any.

    Now that Dominion has settled quietly, I think blue states and counties will be disenchanted and more inclined to use different vendors.

    Let's say Democrats win an election and used Dominion. Subsequently, Trump/MAGA say it was rigged and Fox concurs. What's Dominion's rebuttal? There is no established misbehavior by Fox because there was no admission in settlement, or trial proving it. Waving a $780 million dollar check isn't an effective counter.

    1. Lounsbury

      Aside from the farcical idea that government bureaucracies will be buying voting machines based on settlement or not, the evidence and "counter" is the bloody discovery - the documentation extracted from Fox in legal discovery that led to this settlement you dim sod. An admission in writing is nothing more than an emotional objective for Lefties, it brings no particularly useful extra meaning. The documentary record from the Dominion filing spoke for itself.

      Of course getting an enormous cash settlement is also telling.

              1. Lounsbury

                It takes no intelligence at all to get basic facts right.

                but some people like to whinge on and cry in their beer when their unfactual blithering is pointed out

    2. Laertes

      With 788M of new money in their pockets, Dominion has been made whole. Anyone concerned with the fortunes of their owners needn't worry. They're fine. If the company never earns another dime, the investors have still done well.

    3. lawnorder

      There has already been a summary judgment finding that Fox lied about Dominion. The question for the jury was whether there was malice on the Sullivan standard. If Fox does it again, the question of malice would be a question for a new jury regardless of the outcome of this case, but the finding that Fox lied has become irrefutable since there will be no appeal.

  13. Jfree707

    Simple hush money and Dominion was smart to take it. As embarrassing as some of the details would have been, they would’ve had a hard time justifying the $1.8 B in damages.

    1. Lounsbury

      Damages - there is no Hush Money - they already filed their facts in court filings, and that's in public. Now said filings don't get rebutted by Fox lawyers in court and are quite minable by upcoming lawsuits.

      No hushing at all. Civil lawsuits don't operate - as the judge noted - by surprise. Discovery has already been done and now is out in public.

  14. Rattus Norvegicus

    Wrong stock. Fox holds the movies and broadcast TV stuff. News Corp holds Fox News.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=news+corp+price&sxsrf=APwXEdeUKPXIVhOApxDH8s4F9XIWjAchYQ%3A1681921589903&ei=NRZAZK7nNs_N0PEP2rO1gA8&ved=0ahUKEwju1Z-Xrrb-AhXPJjQIHdpZDfAQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=news+corp+price&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQAzIKCAAQgAQQRhD6ATIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjoKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzoKCAAQigUQsAMQQzoNCAAQ5AIQ1gQQsAMYAToVCC4QigUQxwEQ0QMQyAMQsAMQQxgCOhgILhCKBRDHARDRAxDUAhDIAxCwAxBDGAI6CwgAEIAEELEDEIMBOg0IABCKBRCxAxCDARBDOg0ILhCKBRDHARDRAxBDOgsIABCKBRCxAxCDAToHCAAQigUQQzoECAAQAzoICAAQigUQkQI6CwgAEIoFEJECEIsDOgUIABCABEoECEEYAFC7BVixFGD6F2gBcAF4AIABd4gB9QSSAQMyLjSYAQCgAQHIARO4AQLAAQHaAQYIARABGAnaAQYIAhABGAg&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

  15. DButch

    "reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards."

    So, they're going into comedy now?

Comments are closed.