美国国家公共电台 NPR--The Dominion defamation case against Fox News begins after a 1-day delay

The Dominion¹ defamation² case against Fox News begins after a 1-day delay

Transcript³

NPR's A Martinez speaks with Martin Garbus, a New York lawyer who has argued many high profile First Amendment⁴ cases, about how the case brought against Fox news could affect the media industry.

A MART?NEZ, HOST:

The biggest media trial in decades is set to begin today in Delaware. The case pits conservative media network Fox News against Dominion Voting Systems, a maker⁵ of electronic voting machines. Dominion is suing Fox for broadcasting false claims that Dominion's voting machines changed votes cast for then-President Donald Trump⁶ over to Joe Biden. Dominion wants 1.6 billion in damages, and there are broader issues in the balance for media companies and the way they're held accountable for what they produce. For more, we're joined by First Amendment attorney Martin Garbus. Martin, what makes this lawsuit⁷ so significant for the media industry and the First Amendment?

MARTIN GARBUS: It's an extraordinary examination into what the media does. Times against Sullivan said that the media is responsible if they publish something with actual malice⁸, that if they publish something with reckless disregard of the truth. And this case is the first case since Times against Sullivan, which came down in '64, that really interprets what those words mean - actual malice and recklessness. And in this case, the - Dominion has pulled together 20 statements which were made by Fox people, which they say when that person made the statement, they knew that the claim that Biden or Dominion was involved in election fraud was false.

MART?NEZ: And, Martin, that's what the jury is deciding, right? The trial judge already ruled that the statements were false, but the jury is to decide whether Fox deliberately⁹ aired them knowing they were false.

GARBUS: Yes.

MART?NEZ: OK. So how does this case then compare to past claims against news organizations?

GARBUS: There has never been a case where there's been this much evidence, both of falsity and knowing falsity. And you've never met - seen a case where the actual malice standard is met, as this one is. In other words, when the Fox people put people on, they knew that Sidney Powell was unreliable, that Giuliani was unreliable. And they knew that those people had never checked out, and they knew those people were winging it. So Dominion has a claim to deal with whatever damage they suffered as a result of these actually malicious¹⁰ statements.

MART?NEZ: Then would a win for Dominion weaken New York Times v. Sullivan?

GARBUS: I don't think so because I think that there's never been a case as egregious¹¹ as this. If you saw The New York Times or The Washington Post or even NPR, you'll have one or two people involved, you know, have one or two statements. But here you have all these emails, you have all these admissions, you have all the facts.

MART?NEZ: So you're saying that the evidence in this case makes this a special case, so there wouldn't necessarily be a flood of libel lawsuits¹² all over the place if it goes Dominion's way?

GARBUS: Yes. I think there are always going to be lawsuits any time anybody wins anything. But is this going to jeopardize¹³ the media? No. In fact, it jeopardizes¹⁴ our democracy if people like Fox are not stopped from doing what was done here.

MART?NEZ: But if Fox wins, then, Martin, then is the bar for defamation set too high? I mean, would a win for Fox maybe help efforts to roll back broader protections for journalists?

GARBUS: I don't think so. The facts here are so unique that you cannot say if a New York Times reporter, an NPR reporter makes a mistake, then, as a result of this case, we're going to find actual malice. It's very, very different.

MART?NEZ: If Fox wins, how would it be possible for any news organization to ever lose a case like this?

GARBUS: You're exactly correct.

MART?NEZ: What...

GARBUS: What you just said - exactly correct.

MART?NEZ: What happens then if this lawsuit ends up in a settlement?

GARBUS: I think it should be settled. I don't see why - and I'm astonished it hasn't been settled. I cannot see Fox allowing two months of their people going on the stand admitting they lied and they relied on false facts. It's astonishing to me that this case has not been settled. I think last year, three libel cases were tried to a conclusion over the hundreds that are filed. People recognize that nobody wins if you show all of Fox's laundry here. I'm astonished that they haven't done it.

MART?NEZ: Ultimately, then, in the last 30 seconds we have, Martin, how does this case, one way or the other, affect the work of journalists?

GARBUS: I think that in holding Fox liable, it'll stop other people who are so used to lying on the air. So I think it's a great step forward for the democracy. The world is more than just journalists. The democracy is helped by cleaning out the sewage, and that's what this case can do.

MART?NEZ: That's First Amendment attorney Martin Garbus. Martin, thanks for your time.

GARBUS: Thank you.

1 dominion   

n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图

参考例句：

• Alexander held dominion over a vast area.亚历山大曾统治过辽阔的地域。
• In the affluent society,the authorities are hardly forced to justify their dominion.在富裕社会里，当局几乎无需证明其统治之合理。

2 defamation   

n.诽谤；中伤

参考例句：

• Character defamation can be either oral or written.人格诽谤既可以是口头的也可以是书面的。
• The company sued for defamation.这个公司因受到诽谤而提起诉讼。

3 transcript   

n.抄本，誊本，副本，肄业证书

参考例句：

• A transcript of the tapes was presented as evidence in court.一份录音带的文字本作为证据被呈交法庭。
• They wouldn't let me have a transcript of the interview.他们拒绝给我一份采访的文字整理稿。

4 amendment   

n.改正，修正，改善，修正案

参考例句：

• The amendment was rejected by 207 voters to 143.这项修正案以207票对143票被否决。
• The Opposition has tabled an amendment to the bill.反对党已经就该议案提交了一项修正条款。

5 maker   

n.制造者，制造商

参考例句：

• He is a trouble maker，You must be distant with him.他是个捣蛋鬼，你不要跟他在一起。
• A cabinet maker must be a master craftsman.家具木工必须是技艺高超的手艺人。

6 trump   

n.王牌，法宝；v.打出王牌，吹喇叭

参考例句：

• He was never able to trump up the courage to have a showdown.他始终鼓不起勇气摊牌。
• The coach saved his star player for a trump card.教练保留他的明星选手，作为他的王牌。

7 lawsuit   

n.诉讼，控诉

参考例句：

• They threatened him with a lawsuit.他们以诉讼威逼他。
• He was perpetually involving himself in this long lawsuit.他使自己无休止地卷入这场长时间的诉讼。

8 malice   

n.恶意，怨恨，蓄意；[律]预谋

参考例句：

• I detected a suggestion of malice in his remarks.我觉察出他说的话略带恶意。
• There was a strong current of malice in many of his portraits.他的许多肖像画中都透着一股强烈的怨恨。

9 deliberately   

adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地

参考例句：

• The girl gave the show away deliberately.女孩故意泄露秘密。
• They deliberately shifted off the argument.他们故意回避这个论点。

10 malicious   

adj.有恶意的，心怀恶意的

参考例句：

• You ought to kick back at such malicious slander. 你应当反击这种恶毒的污蔑。
• Their talk was slightly malicious.他们的谈话有点儿心怀不轨。

11 egregious   

adj.非常的，过分的

参考例句：

• When it comes to blatant lies,there are none more egregious than budget figures.谈到公众谎言，没有比预算数字更令人震惊的。
• What an egregious example was here!现摆着一个多么触目惊心的例子啊。

12 lawsuits   

n.诉讼( lawsuit的名词复数 )

参考例句：

• Lawsuits involving property rights and farming and grazing rights increased markedly. 涉及财产权，耕作与放牧权的诉讼案件显著地增加。 来自辞典例句
• I've lost and won more lawsuits than any man in England. 全英国的人算我官司打得最多，赢的也多，输的也多。 来自辞典例句

13 jeopardize   

vt.危及，损害

参考例句：

• Overworking can jeopardize your health.工作过量可能会危及你的健康。
• If you are rude to the boss it may jeopardize your chances of success.如果你对上司无礼，那就可能断送你成功的机会。

14 jeopardizes   

危及，损害( jeopardize的第三人称单数 )

参考例句：

• If your reckless behavior jeopardizes this mission, you're out! 如果你不注意你的言行，会危及到这次任务你也会被开除！
• Factionalism now seriously jeopardizes our overall interest. 现在闹派性已经严重地妨害我们的大局。