Repeating a blogosphere summary of a myth doesn't make the myth true either. Because you've bought the myth, let me see if I can help you a bit here by directing you to the text of the actual appellate court decision.
First, your blogosphere friends may have failed to mention to you that the appellate court decision only dealt with a "whistle-blower" case that Wilson brought against the station regarding her termination of employment. It DID NOT deal with any of the issues relating to Fox's decision to air / not air / modify / whatever the news report about Mansanto because those claims had already been decided and
Wilson already LOST on those claims.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-distri...l/1310807.html
I any case, above is the text of the Feb 2003 decision you cited. I challenge you to find any language that bestows on the station the "right to lie". As stated, the language you posted above specifically determined whether or not Aker had standing to pursue a whistle-blower claim. To that end:
"Because the FCC’s news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a judgment in favor of WTVT."
Yes, the whistle-blower claim was Akre alleging that the station fired her because she threatened to complain to the FCC "alleging that the station had “illegally” edited the still unfinished BGH report in violation of an FCC policy against federally licensed broadcasters deliberately distorting the news."
However, the neither Akre or Wilson filed a claim with the FCC alleging a violation of FCC rules. They have - unsuccessfully - petitioned the FCC to deny WTVT a broadcast license however.
05-15-2014, 11:19 AM
Threaded Mode