search
top

John Stossel Is Suing Facebook.

Long time reported John Stossel is suing Facebook for the censuring of his videos. Normally, as a private company, Facebook can do what it wants and decide what is allowed on its platform. Yet Stossel is making a different claim.

Stossel is claiming that Facebook’s “independent fact checkers” censored and or labeled his videos based on things he never said.

(The above video gives examples.)

According to Stossel’s lawsuit, in the past year he posted two short video reports on Facebook in which he “interviewed experts in the climate change arena.”

In one video, “Government Fueled Fires,” about the 2020 wildfires in California, Facebook and its fact-checking partners “falsely attributed to Stossel a claim he never made, and on that basis flagged the content as ‘misleading’ and ‘missing context,’ so that would-be viewers would be routed to the false attribution statement.” The complaint says that Stossel’s video “explored a scientific hypothesis” that “while climate change undoubtedly contributes to forest fires, it was not the primary cause of the 2020 California fires.” Per the suit, Stossel says he never made the claim that “Forest fires are caused by poor management. Not by climate change,” which was in Facebook’s fact-check.

On the second video, “Are We Doomed?”, Facebook added a “partly false”/“factual inaccuracies” label. That video questioned claims made by those Stossel refers to as “environmental alarmists,” including “claims that hurricanes are getting stronger, that sea level rise poses a catastrophic threat, and that humans will be unable to cope with the fallout.” Stossel claims the Facebook fact-check didn’t actually challenge any facts in the video, and he argues that the company’s fact-check process “is nothing more than a pretext… to defame users with impunity, particularly when Defendants disagree with the scientific opinions expressed in user content.”

What Stossel is claiming that his videos were labeled as generally misleading and that determination was based on the fact checkers claiming he said things he did not.

In one case, two of the three “fact checkers” never even reviewed or watched the videos before they slapped a label saying the video and he statements were misleading.

Because the determinations of being misleading were based on things Stossel did not say, and the fact that the income from the videos dropped because of that determination, Stossel has a claim of economic damages.

No matter how powerful you are, you cannot go running around recklessly defaming people and costing them money.

Which is why Stossel is suing.

This will be fun to watch as it pits a mega corporation against a guy with “right” and the law on his side.

We know who we are rooting for.

stossel




Comments are closed.

top