There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

krayj , (edited )

As much as I love seeing more lawsuits pile up against Fox, I just don’t see any merit to these cases.

Both cases claim that fox has “a longstanding habit” of allowing conspiracy theories and inviting defamation lawsuits that would damage the company’s value (affecting their investment).

If you are an investor, is it not your duty/responsibility to vet the investment before investing? If fox had a “longstanding” habit of it, then this means it’s been going on a while, and that it was an obvious thing that everybody (including those investment/pension funds) knew about.

Companies take gambles all the time. Sometimes they pay out, and sometimes those gambles lose money. In this case, the gamble was paying out bigtime in the short run but they lost in the long run. That’s business. It’s the investor’s responsibility to make the decision and all the facts of the case were available to anyone with the will to do their due diligence (I mean, everything they are complaining about was broadcast on public television, it’s not like Fox was hiding anything).

This is a case of investor incompetence, imo.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines