Live data from Hacker News

Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

apnews.com

61–70 of 308 posts

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#61

~1/3 of their annual revenue. Not nothing, but likely small enough that it’s just a cost of doing business and not a real deterrent. IMO.

I imagine they likely have insurance for things like this. Or at least I would, if my business model was largely based on libel.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're faster.

Are they? we used to have same day numbers... Now elections can take weeks to figure out who won. Progress in the negative direction.

Can you point to a solid reference that national elections had same day numbers and the years of those election s?

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The arguments pro and con are purely motivated by partisan concerns. its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id, therefore voter id laws supposedly favors republicans. that supposed fact is at the heart of the entire debate and as far as i know there is nothing more to it.

> its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID - when massive developing countries like India that are still struggling with basic things like sanitation have long ago solved this problem - is nothing short of embarrassing. There are people in rural India that live in straw huts tha…

India's voter ID cards are federal IDs issued by the Election Commission of India. There is no such widespread federal ID in the United States and likely no feasible candidates for quickly ramping up ID card issuance to all U.S. voters. And my guess is that most political support for voter ID laws is paired with explicit opposition to any competently-run federal ID program.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterargument is that mail in ballots help increase voter turnouts and that requiring id will turn people away. It's a weak argument because you shouldn't try to increase turnout by making voting less secure. Any other solution should be found instead.

What, exactly is insecure about voting by mail? Are drop off ballot boxes also insecure? In the same or different ways?

Mostly same way. Drop off ballot boxes are vulnerable to insiders while election day voting isn't really. It is much easier to have tons of volunteers watch the votes on election day compared yo watching votes for e.g. a couple of weeks.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#65

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

Are you just talking about the part of election security that ensures that only eligible voters vote (and each only once)? Because paper ballots have little to do with many other aspects of election security.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Count me as one who strongly opposes mail-in and early voting because I believe it violates the sanctity of the voting booth.

"sanctity of the voting booth"?! > More than one in five polling places have closed over the last decade, according to an ABC News and ABC Owned Stations analysis of data from the Election Administration and Voting Survey, the Center for New Data and the Center for Public Integrity. https://abcnews.go.com/US/protecting-vote-1-5-election-day-p... This is after Shelby County v. Holder, and now states are shutting down…

Yes that’s right, the sanctity of the voting booth. The ability, and indeed the requirement, to vote in private so as to avoid all influence is an important value. Of course, one may prepare beforehand.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#67
post #20

It's pretty sad that is these sort of ticky-tacky lawsuits are really the only mechanism we seem have of holding these "news" networks responsible for brazen repeated lies that are hugely damaging to our society (like saying a election was stolen). And that wasn't even the problem, it's that their lies created damages for another corporation.

Related: “I find all of this so weird because of how it _elevates_ finance. [Various cases] imply that we are not entitled to be protected from pollution as _citizens_, or as _humans_. [Another] implies that we are not entitled to be told the truth _as citizens_. (Which: is true!) Rather, in each case, we are only entitled to be protected from lies _as shareholders_. The great harm of pollution, or of political disho…

I was thinking this opens them up to a shareholder suit for mismanagement, breach of duty, or possibly even fraud?

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#68

Unpopular opinion: Paper ballots with in person voting (with an ID) is the only 100% fool proof and verifiable voting system. Everything else could be manipulated or hacked. And when there's trillions of dollars and world power on the line, it's just a matter of time when the "could be" turns to "would be".

Im so old I can remember when this used to be a common left-wing opinion. BTW, Dominion is actually diebold amalgamated with a couple other "voting" machine vendors into a single corporation.

Yep, it's disconcerting to see HN'ers demand that their federal government trump states' rights and issue mandatory centralized digital IDs.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID - when massive developing countries like India that are still struggling with basic things like sanitation have long ago solved this problem - is nothing short of embarrassing. There are people in rural India that live in straw huts tha…

We've been trusting our voters' word for centuries and it hasn't been a problem yet. Why all the distrust all of a sudden? What changed?

You can't enter Costco anymore without scanning your ID card and them checking your face because people were cheating. I asked one of the cashiers when they first rolled out more stringent ID checks and she said they were catching 5-10 people a day where the photo didn't match.

Likewise you can't enter a bar, buy booze or cigarettes, rent a car or hotel room without ID because no one can be trusted.

> it hasn't been a problem yet

This is a bit naive. The hackers of yore (think RMS) would refuse to set passwords on their accounts. Those days are over. Would you be open to having a blank password on your HN account? If not, why? It hasn't been a problem yet.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#70
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be true if the source of funding were the standard kind of corporate funding. But there’s reason to believe that the backing money behind this corporation does not care in the slightest and regards this sort of poultry fine as merely the cost of doing its particular business, which is also not a standard type of corporate business.

It's "paltry."

"What's $1,000? Mere chicken-feed. A poultry matter." (Groucho Marx)
Post reply on HN