Fox News host Jeanine Pirro went quiet after co-host Jessica Tarlov brought up her purported vaccine status.
  • PunnyName@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1433·
    10 months ago

    They have to be vaccinated to keep working, despite the bullshit they peddle.

    • ZeroCool@feddit.chOPEnglish
      1001·
      10 months ago

      Yep and the only people unaware of that mandatory vaccination requirement seem to be Fox News’ viewers. So I find this very amusing.

      • flipht@kbin.social
        251·
        10 months ago

        That’s the thing about everyone posting about publication of private fact…there’s no private fact here.

        It’s been well publicized that Fox required all their employees to get vaccinated in order to continue there.

        If she was there during that time, and she’s still working, it’s public knowledge that she’s vaccinated.

      • ramble81@lemm.eeEnglish
        12·
        10 months ago

        “but, but, they have to be! Otherwise the man won’t let them get the truth out to us. They’re sacrificing themselves and conforming so we can get THE TRUTH”

  • Agent641@lemmy.worldEnglish
    903·
    10 months ago

    You are anti-vax because youre a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

    I am anti-vax because I crave death.

    straightens tie

    We are not the same.

  • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.worldEnglish
    157·
    10 months ago

    DURRRRR ONLY LIBTURDS EAT THEIR OWN WHY CONSERVATIVE EAT SELF NO STEP ON SNEK OR EAT OR SNEK TAIL

    DURRRR

  • Tylerdurdon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    924·
    10 months ago

    Wouldn’t that be PHI disclosure in some fashion? I smell hyenas turning on each other and lawsuits blazing.

    • Hillock@kbin.social
      192·
      10 months ago

      No, HIPAA only applies to people who work in the health sector or are associated with it. Anyone else, including journalists and media people don’t have to follow these rules. They can talk about the healt status of others as they please. The only concern would be defamation but that’s also only an issue if the statement is false.

      While HIPAA doesn’t apply in this case, it’s irrelevant. It could still be considered Publication of a Private Fact which is punishable under US law.

      It’s unlikely this would be successful but there is enough grounds for a lawsuit to not be thrown out immediately.

      • everett@lemmy.mlEnglish
        10·
        10 months ago

        Is it still a private fact when Fox News has (or at least had in 2021) a well-publicized vaccine requirement for employees?

        • Hillock@kbin.social
          2·
          10 months ago

          I don’t think so. I also don’t think that a reasonable person would be offended by having their vaccination status disclosed. So winning a potential lawsuit would be unlikely.

          But I think there is enough grounds to at least have it go to trial. While claiming a HIPAA violation wouldn’t even make it that far since it doesn’t apply here.

      • XeroxCool@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        10 months ago

        The logic against HIPAA doesn’t apply. Boebert claimed asking her on air was a violation so it was then spouted by every viewer after that.

        • Hillock@kbin.social
          8·
          10 months ago

          I read through it but defamation per se still talks about false statements. The difference is that you don’t have to prove damages.
          But while reading up on it, turns out the first comment was indeed right. Publication of a Private Fact can be punishable even if the statement is true.

          It’s very questionable wether the statement fulfills the requirements. It’s already publicly known that FOX employees require vaccinations and it’s doubtful disclosing this fact is offensive to a reasonable person but there is at least some potential here.

      • Tylerdurdon@lemmy.worldEnglish
        52·
        10 months ago

        So then why do we have to watch those horrendous videos on the disclosure of PHI, even in non-related fields? I do it yearly and have been Clockwork-Orange-educated into knowing what it looks like, how it should be transmitted, etc.

        It really makes me think the company would be liable in some way.

        • Nougat@kbin.social
          10·
          10 months ago

          I believe that the non-disclosure applies to companies or individuals who have a relationship with a person as a client, or some other kind of business relationship. My doctor or insurance company has to protect my medical information, but if my neighbor finds out I’m rocking just one nut, he can tell anyone he wants.

        • Hillock@kbin.social
          4·
          10 months ago

          That would depend on your work. Maybe you are working for a company that is associated or a subcontractor with the health care industry.

          An accountant overseeing the finances of a small clinic or a contractor doing renovations in a hospital both have to abide by HIPAA to a degree.

    • Acedelgado@artemis.camp
      76·
      10 months ago

      Because it exposes that someone who is making a living capitalizing off of extremist views that spread mass harm to the populace is a hypocrite that made sure to protect herself while telling everyone else that protection is a hoax, or at the least untrustworthy and harmful. Calling these people on their bullshit is a good thing to do. It’s not the same thing as “OMG did you hear Taylor Swift broke up with her 35th boyfriend?!”, it actually has real world consequences.