Could Fox News Woes Lead to Sky Deal Falling?
Fallout from the long-playing Fox News sexual harassment scandal continued to spread Friday, bringing increased scrutiny from U.S. investigators and threatening Chairman Rupert Murdoch's bid to complete 21st Century Fox's $14.8 billion acquisition of Sky News in the U.K.
May 08, 2017 at 09:01 AM
6 minute read
Fallout from the long-playing Fox News sexual harassment scandal continued to spread Friday, bringing increased scrutiny from U.S. investigators and threatening Chairman Rupert Murdoch's bid to complete 21st Century Fox's $14.8 billion acquisition of Sky News in the U.K.
With approval of the deal expected next month, a lead attorney for several current and former Fox News employees is urging British regulators to consider what he describes as the network's pattern of gender and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation. The deal's fate could now turn on what's known as the “fit and proper” test—a requirement that any person holding a UK broadcasting license is and remains fit and proper to do so.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice broadened its probe into allegations of sexual and racial harassment at the news operation, questioning anchors and former employees of the news network of choice for most politically conservative Americans, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Murdoch.
That news comes one day after radio reporter Jessica Golloher, a Middle East correspondent who has worked at Fox News since 2008, filed a sexual harassment suit in New York State Supreme Court. She claimed she was fired in retaliation for reaching out to Paul Weiss attorney Michele Hirshman about the alleged mistreatment, a charge that Fox News immediately denied.
Golloher is represented by New York-based attorney Douglas Wigdor, who made even more waves across the Atlantic with an explosive letter he sent on behalf of 19 current and former Fox News employees to Sharon White, chief executive at the British regulatory agency Ofcom. With European antitrust officials approving the Fox-Sky merger last month, Ofcom will have the final regulatory word on the deal.
The letter detailed allegations of “gender and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation” going back eight years at Fox, and said executives at the media company attempted to “intimidate and silence victims of discrimination and force them to litigate their claims in confidential arbitrations in order to prevent the public from learning about its unlawful conduct.”
Ofcom officials indicated that Thursday that they will take the letter and the ongoing harassment cases at Fox News into account in their decision, which they will make public on June 20. The clearance from European regulators indicates the two companies have their financial ducks in a row, so the key to Ofcom's approval of the deal at this point would seem to be the ambiguous phrase “fit and proper.”
“It does sound very British,” said Brian Quinn, an associate professor of law at Boston College Law School, “but in fact it's not so much different than the 'in the public interest' standard that our FCC [Federal Communications Commission] would use in considering a station license transfer.”
There's virtually no case law involving the standard, with the exception of Murdoch's 2010 effort to acquire Sky. That case was abandoned, amid a huge public outcry over the News Corp. phone hacking scandal, before a ruling was issued.
Allen & Overy is acting for longstanding client 21st Century Fox on the proposed deal, leading on corporate, regulatory and competition matters. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom and Simpson Thatcher Bartlett are also advising 21st Century Fox on the deal.
Robert Profusek, a New York-based partner at Jones Day and chair of the firm's global M&A practice, said he expects the deal to be approved.
“Not to downplay in any way these discrimination allegations, but [the phone hacking scandal] was a very serious situation in which a people and companies at home and abroad suffered,” he said. “At some point, when a company has identified a problem, called in a law firm to clean up the problem and change the culture, there's not much more you can do, and I would suspect that would be recognized.”
The majority of the harassment cases involving Fox News remain unresolved however, so the concept of moving forward positively could be a tougher sell.
But Profusek said: “I think more relevant than the harassment cases is the fact that Fox already owns 39 percent of Sky, so the idea of blocking them at this point doesn't make much sense.”
It has been a tumultuous few months for Fox News, with multiple high-profile claims of sexual and racial harassment aimed at its top brass.
Chief Executive Roger Ailes lost his job following claims made against him by former “Fox & Friends” co-host Gretchen Carlson, who said Ailes ogled her and suggested a sexual relationship.
Bill O'Reilly, the popular firebrand anchor, was dismissed last month amid sexual harassment allegations. Five women were paid $13 million to settle harassment suits targeting the host, the New York Times reported.
In April, 13 current and former employees of Fox News filed three separate legal actions against the organization, alleging years of “hostile racial discrimination.”
Eleven people, including Emmy-winning reporter Kelly Wright, filed a class-action lawsuit against the network in New York State Supreme Court; a 12th former employee filed a separate discrimination lawsuit in federal court in the Southern District of New York; and a 13th person turned to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with a discrimination charge.
All of the complaints targeted Judith Slater, the company's comptroller Fox News fired in late February, and accused her of racial harassment. It was against that backdrop that Bill Shine, who had been with the company since its founding in 1996, resigned as co-president.
Related Articles:
|Todd Cunningham covers entertainment, media and sports law in Los Angeles for The Recorder and Law.com. Contact him at [email protected]. On Twitter: @toddcnnnghm
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNLRB Bans 'Captive Audience' Meetings, Yanking Away Platform Employers Used to Combat Unionizing
3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readElection Outcome Could Spur Policy U-Turns Across Employment Landscape
6 minute readEx-Twitter Exec Sues for $20M, Says Musk Fired Her as 'Petty Retribution'
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250