Man confronts Tucker Carlson over his anti-vaccine rhetoric:
“You are the worst human being known to man. I want you to know that… What you have done to this state, to the United States… What you’ve done to people’s families…”pic.twitter.com/RuwacoIecR
— Ahmed Baba (@AhmedBaba_) July 24, 2021
The NPCs are already hypnotized with the “anti-vaxx means murder” mantra.
Tucker Carlson is still not endorsing the coronavirus “vaccine.” The mainstream media is going crazy over it, and is now aggressively pushing a new talking point: saying anything against vaccines, even pointing out official data, can cause people to die and may be grounds for a lawsuit.
From liberal state media outlet Slate:
Since the vaccines for COVID-19 became available, public health authorities, respected medical professionals, some employers, and responsible politicians have been urging, coercing, and bribing us all to get immunized. With the emergence of the more infectious, more virulent, and now dominant delta variant, soaring positive rates have pumped new urgency into these pleas. Yet vaccine uptake rates have slowed to a crawl, and most of those who remain unvaccinated say they don’t plan to change their minds. Unless that changes, expect higher mortality rates, breakthrough infections, and potentially a return to the pandemic lockdown state we’d all hoped we’d left behind.
That sure sounds like a threat.
A constellation of reasons can be cited for ongoing vaccine hesitancy, but one key factor is the prevalence of quack “experts” willing to misinterpret data, lie about statistics, and just plain make stuff up. Leading the misinformation charge has been Fox News—and particularly Tucker Carlson. Night after night, Carlson has provided a platform for sowing fear and confusion among his viewers about the efficacy of the vaccine and its side effects. Although the network has recently sounded a more responsible note, that turnabout has by no means been across the entire network and it comes too late for an untold number of people who have been newly sickened or died from the disease, and who might have been saved through immunization. There may actually be some legal remedy, though, for the damage wrought by the network. COVID victims who were taken in by Carlson’s vaccination misinformation, or their estates, may be able to sue Fox News under the ancient common law theory of fraud. They would have a reasonably good chance of success, too.
Tort law allows anyone injured by the intentional bad act of another to sue for personal injury, property damage, or economic loss caused by the wrongful activity. The specific claim that relates to harm caused by deliberate misrepresentations is fraud, and, depending on what misinformation someone ingested, and how they reacted to it, it’s easy to imagine that many viewers would be able to state a good claim. What’s needed to prove a case for fraud is clearly established through centuries of judicial decisions.
First, the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant made a misstatement of fact, knowing that it was false or with reckless disregard as to whether it was true or false. (“Reckless disregard” means that the defendant did no investigation at all, but just put the statements out there.) Examples of such misstatements on Fox are abundant. Here are a few clips (starting about 50 seconds in) where Carlson and Lara Trump, as a guest on Sean Hannity’s show, say that COVID is really about “social control,” and where Carlson calls the COVID response a “scandal.” Here’s Carlsonquestioning whether the vaccine works, since those who are vaccinated are still urged to take precautions: “Maybe it doesn’t work, and they’re simply not telling you that.” (This is not how vaccine efficacy works. No immunization is 100 percent effective, so there’s always a small chance of infection, a smaller chance of illness, and an infinitesimally small chance of death even among the fully vaccinated.)
That’s the kind of lie that meets the definition the author has just given.
Here’s Carlson giving airtime to Alex Berenson, “The Pandemic’s Wrongest Man,” allowing him to spout more nonsense about the vaccine’s supposed lack of efficacy. Want more? Beyond Carlson, here (starting at about 3:21) are some Fox News personalities misrepresenting the door-to-door effort by the Biden administration to educate people and answer their questions about the vaccine. It’s the Taliban! It’s a violation of medical privacy! It’s to force you to take the vaccine! (No, no, and no. The vaccine educators are from the local community; they don’t even work for the government.) These purveyors of misinformation are either lying, or acting in reckless disregard of truth versus falsity by not doing even the most basic research to check out what they’re spewing. And it’s also considered a misrepresentation to state a half-truth, leaving out vital information needed to place a statement in context. That’s exactly the case with Carlson’s mock questioning of the vaccine’s efficacy; it paints a willfully incomplete picture.
To prevail on a fraud claim, the plaintiff next has to show that the defendant intended that the injured party rely on the misrepresentation (this can be inferred from the fact that Fox holds itself out as a purveyor of news) and that the plaintiff reasonably relied on the misstatement. Each potential plaintiff would have to allege, and then prove, that they had relied on Fox and the “experts” making the statements that induced them to forgo vaccination. It’s impossible to imagine that at least some of the sickened and killed didn’t count on Carlson, his guests, and the rest of the Fox misinformers, and it would be hard to hear Fox attorneys claim that no one should “reasonably” rely on what their news station puts out. (Ironically, the network has successfully made this argument in court before, but in a case that involved statements by Carlson that might reasonably be seen as hyperbole. It’s a different story when he puts out information—some of it from so-called experts—that makes demonstrably false claims in a case involving hard facts.)
If you think this lawsuit plan sounds insane, just look at what they’ve done to Alex Jones with the Sandy Hoax case. However, a vaccine lawsuit would mean that all of the actual data would be presented in court, which they would not want.
Or course, you can’t sue the vaccine manufacturers – they are 100% protected from liability, and when you get the vaccine, you are agreeing that any consequence, including death, is your own problem.
Even the inventor of the mRNA technology the vaccines use thinks the government is not being transparent about what the risks are, and states that these are experimental vaccines.
Coronavirus is a fake disease. It’s just the flu.
The Guardian is also pushing this idea that saying anything against the vaccines is like killing people.
The effects of anti-vaccine rhetoric could be severe. At least 99% of people in the US who died from coronavirus in the last six months were not vaccinated, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said.
In Democracy Land, people can’t be trusted to process information on their own and make their own choices.
Even if you believed the government was right, this is the total infantilization of the public, where they are viewed as completely incapable of making their own decisions, and have to be protected from wrong ideas because they are too stupid to process information.
If people are truly incapable of processing information and making their own decisions, you have to wonder what exactly “democracy” is intended to do.