Posted on 06/08/2023 8:45:31 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
FOX is threatening to sue Tucker Carlson for breach of contract over his new show on Twitter. Tucker on Twitter launched its first episode this week and it generated huge viewership numbers.
The truth is that Tucker has the ability to attract a much larger audience on social media than he did on television for FNC, even though his show was the cable new network’s highest rated show. His fans are loyal and they will follow him wherever he goes. FNC must have known that when they decided to make him a scapegoat for the settlement with Dominion Voting Systems, in my opinion. He is just as successful away from FNC as he was with the network, if not more so.
The first episode, in case you are one of the few people who has not seen it, is 10 minutes long and done in monologue style. Carlson addresses Ukraine, UFOs and the mistake people make when they rely on cable news for their information. It has been viewed more than 80 million times, and counting. In comparison, his show on FNC averaged 3.1 million viewers each weeknight during the weeks leading up to his firing.
When he was ousted at FNC, he took the opportunity to move to doing a show on Twitter. Now FOX’s lawyers have sent a letter to Carlson’s lawyers saying he is in breach of his contract for starting a new show. He is still under contract with FOX until January 2025, after the election.
Carlson’s lawyers argue that he is utilizing his First Amendment rights by doing the show on social media – he is voicing his opinions on the platform, just like other Twitter users do. It is reported that his lawyers are looking for a way out of his $25M per year contract with FOX. Because of the current contract, he is unable to move to another network to work.
In the statement to Axios, Carlson’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, accused Fox brass of engaging in hypocrisy by silencing Carlson, pointing to how the company claims to ‘defend its very existence on freedom of speech grounds.’
‘Now they want to take Tucker Carlson’s right to speak freely away from him because he took to social media to share his thoughts on current events,’ Freedman wrote in he letter viewed by Axios.
He reportedly added: ‘This evening we were made aware of Mr. Tucker Carlson’s appearance on Twitter in a video that lasted over 10 minutes.’
Quoting Carlson’s contract, the letter continues: ‘Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Mr. Carlson’s ‘services shall be completely exclusive to Fox.’
It adds that Carlson’s contract says he is ‘prohibited from rendering services of any type whatsoever, whether ‘over the internet via streaming or similar distribution, or other digital distribution whether now known or hereafter devised.’
Hmm. I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one on the interwebs but it seems to me that Tucker may have a legit pushback argument here. Even the write-ups about the debut on Twitter pointed out that it was bare-bones and Tucker did everything himself, like operating a teleprompter with a button positioned next to him. It wasn’t some slickly produced video production. It wasn’t a YouTube video, either. Your mileage may vary.
Elon Musk retweeted the episode after it aired and praised Tucker for coming to Twitter. ‘Would be great to have shows from all parts of the political spectrum on this platform!’ Musk added that he has not signed a deal with Carlson when Tucker announced he would be moving to Twitter.
The letter from FOX came on May 9. Carlson’s lawyers sent “an aggressive letter” to FOX executives accusing them of fraud and breach of contract. They claim that Carlson shouldn’t be bound by the non-compete clause. FOX wants to keep paying Carlson, which prevents him from starting a competing show.
His lawyers indicate that legal action will soon be taken.
The letter was sent by Carlson’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, to Fox officials Viet Dinh, the company’s chief legal officer, and Irena Briganti, the head of corporate communications.
It claimed that Fox employees, including ‘Rupert Murdoch himself,’ broke promises to Carlson ‘intentionally and with reckless disregard for the truth,’ Axios reported.
The lawyers reportedly accused Fox executives, believed to be Dinh and Murdoch, of making ‘material representations’ to Carlson that were intentionally broken, constituting fraud.
The letter claimed that Fox broke a promise not to leak Carlson’s private messages.
The letter also alleged Fox broke promises not to settle with Dominion Voting Systems ‘in a way which would indicate wrongdoing’ on the part of Carlson, and backtracked on a deal not to do anything in a settlement that would harm Carlson’s reputation.
The letter stated: ‘These actions not only breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the Agreement, but give rise to claims for breach of contract, and intentional and negligent misrepresentation.’
Carlson claims in the letter that Briganti attempted to ‘undermine, embarrass, and interfere’ with Carlson’s future business prospects, which he maintains would constitute another breach of his employment contract.
‘Make no mistake, we intend to subpoena Ms. Briganti’s cell phone records and related documents, which evidence communications with her and all media, including, but not limited to The New York Times,’ the letter said.
FOX denies Tucker lost his job because of the settlement with Dominion. A lawyer for Dominion said that firing Tucker was not a part of the settlement.
Carlson has no intention of going away and he won’t be silenced. We’ll see where all this goes.
*Correction: The letter from FOX was on May 9. This part of the story has been corrected. My apologies for the confusion. – Karen
Tucker is working for himself. There are no “services” provided.
From what I've seen in legal circles, Carlson can breach the contract to his heart's content -- and the only recourse FOX has is that they don't pay him for the rest of his contract. They can't force him to accept the money they want to pay him, and if he breaches the contract they cannot show that they've suffered any damages.
I wonder how you legally determine the difference between a news channel program, and simply expressing one’s opinion in a tweet.
Is Tucker no longer to have and express personal opinions digitally anywhere?
RE: the only recourse FOX has is that they don’t pay him for the rest of his contract.
I wonder how much Tucker is getting for his Twitter show ...
Tucker could start a network if he desires.
Yes, agreed, and I've said the same thing.
In fact, Tucker might just own Fox News some day.
Not as long as he wants to be paid by Fox.
If he doesn't mind losing the money still owed under his contract, he can speak out all he wants, at least as I understand it.
I haven’t seen it. I want to but have just been pretty busy lately to stop and do that. But what intrigues me, and I don’t know the ins and outs of it, is this stuff about UFO’s being real. I never have believed in UFO’s and Tucker seems a grounded kind of guy so it’s strange to me he went into this. Makes me wonder, I still feel it’s not real but if it could be shown to me to be real I’d go with it.
Plus, is he getting paid for the Twitter broadcasts?
100 million watched his first video, at best what, 3 million watch any Fox News show? Pretty good ratio to bet on, if Twitter charged a penny per view that’s $1 million for just one video. And Tucker will file a countersuit as well.
Yup. He went self employed to no one in particular. Who pays him for his so-called “services”?
Let this be a lesson to anyone who works for the media. If they cancel a show then that host is free to walk(and get paid damages). That needs to be in the contract. I am surprised that Tucker did not see this coming.
He just released a second one as well.
😎
I agree, they will not get to silence Tucker, particularly if he’s not worried about losing some money.
About the only recourse now is to have the FBI, or some agency, find a way to download child porn to his computer.
I think Tucker is daring them to sue him. Fox wants to silence him but they don’t want to sue him because of what will come out in discovery. Screw Faux news.
So his contract says he is forbidden from ever working again in the line of work he has been doing for 30 years?
I kind of think this violates so many laws I can’t even count.
Paying Tucker isn’t the only compensation Tucker gets. His show is also an asset. Fox took his show away and refused to allow him to perform. Remember, Tucker is entertainment. The contract was not about paying tucker for his reputation for all time, it was for performances. Once Fox decided not to allow Tucker to perform on Fox, Fox effectively terminated the contract.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.