You realize this tweet is attempting to discredit a legal brief as being one-sided to defend a "news" organization who has ADMITTED they're one sided, right. Lachlan Murdoch literally said as much. Guess which party has to source their material and which one says whatever they want, even when they know it's not true.
And the subject of the one-sided "news" coverage are lies about a private company that the evidence clearly shows FNC knew were lies, but told them repeatedly anyway.
FNC defends their coverage by saying they were only covering what Trump was claiming, not saying it was necessarily true. That EXACT SAME ARGUMENT could be made for covering Dominion's lawsuit. This tweet is simplistic, shallow, and poorly thought-out... even at an elementary level. Anybody with a modicum of reasoning can blow his argument out of the water.
Notice how FNC isn't saying Dominion's claims are false, they're saying their speech is protected. Rupert Murdoch's defense appears to be that FNC can't be held accountable for the speech of it's hosts. That could be the only reason he was naming Lou and Maria by name as "endorsing" lies and admitting he could've stopped it, but didn't.
This decision won't be about whether FNC was correct in their repeated lies that the election is stolen. FNC isn't claiming the election was stolen in court (truth is a perfect defense to defamation, so it would be an automatic victory if it were true), they're claiming they can lie because it's "news" since Trump said it first. ?
__________
By the way, FNC's hosts have stood on the stage with their candidate at rallies and FNC provided the political opposition's ads to their chosen candidate prior to their air date. The far-right likes to try and equivocate by claiming CNN is just as far left, but that's provably false as there is no evidence of bias to those extremes.
PS. Go read the sworn depositions yourself. Link below...
(MM has basically turned into 8kun for the far right. It's no wonder that nobody posts here anymore. SMH)