Regular readers of the blog will note that weeks ago, we predicted that Fox would face liability issues over its coverage of the coronavirus pandemic. Indeed, we even cited quotes demonstrating that Fox News and the Murdochs understood that they had real exposure due to its Fox News coverage. As an example:

The Murdochs, of course, own Fox News. So, they were taken personal steps to protect themselves while anchors like Trish Regan and Sean Hannity were telling viewers that it’s a hoax and putting themselves in potentially mortal danger. So I think this is a case where Fox’s coverage, if it actually winds up being proved that people died because of it, this is a new terrain in terms of Fox being possibly held liable for their actions.

Of course, there are many other quotes on the net reflecting their fear of liability, particularly after our piece shot around the nation.

Now, an obscure Washington state group is the first to file a lawsuit seeking an injunction against Fox. Except this lawsuit goes further, and even names Comcast for providing the cable to transmit Fox into one’s home. Recall when we said that Fox could be sued out of existence? If one makes the cable carrier liable for the content (which may not be a good idea as a matter of public policy, I don’t know), and that changes the stakes in the matter entirely:

The 10-page complaint — filed Thursday in King County — also names as defendants Fox News Corp., owner Rupert Murdoch, AT&T TV and COMCAST.

It seeks an injunction to prohibit the conservative-leaning outlet from “interfering with reasonable and necessary measures to contain the virus by publishing further false and deceptive content.”

Arthur West, leader of the 3-year-old Washington League for Increased Transparency and Ethics, or WASHLITE, the plaintiff, said in a phone interview that its members have run into people who still believe earlier Fox News reports that the pandemic was a hoax.

Now, circumstances are such that I happen to be a Washington attorney and I just read through the complaint (Which can be read here). It is compelling. But the Murdochs should take heart with a couple of facts. Washington doesn’t allow for punitive damages, thus there would be no hundreds of millions awarded just to punish Fox. Second, this lawsuit doesn’t yet seek monetary damages of any kind, it only seeks an order for declaratory relief, getting an injunction that prohibits Fox News from ever again referring to the matter as a “hoax” or Democratic-inspired issue, or similar issues again.

This lawsuit is clearly intended to send a message: “You are responsible for the content that is putting people at danger. You must stop. And we may amend this to go after money.”

This case will not go to a jury, either – not unless they amend it to go after money damages. This case is one for declaratory relief, for an injunction. A judge will determine whether to issue the order on a temporary or permanent basis.

The real threat to the Murdochs will come when people begin to sue for money damages for the loss of loved ones, and-or have Fox declared a public nuisance and taken off the air. Those are the type of lawsuits are of the category that must keep Rupert and Sean Hannity up all night, Trump, too.

****

Peace, y’all

Jason

[email protected] and on Twitter @MiciakZoom