On April 1, 2026, ReallyCoolNews was mentioned on a YouTube video by Jonathan “Frauditor Troll” Hudon-Huneault who was apparently upset by a provocative headline on a news story that we produced questioning the expenses related to turning a simple motion opposing an in-person hearing into a 20+ page monstrosity.
To his credit, the monstrosity worked. As we reported on our nightly live show on April 1, 2026, mere minutes after it had been released, the judge ruled in his favor. We reported on it again on April 2, again, giving him credit for the ruling going in his favor.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi wrote:
TEXT-ONLY ORDER. Plaintiff’s administrative request for remote appearance (Dkt. No. 101 ) is denied. The hearing on defendants’ motion for dismissal for forum non conveniens (Dkt. No. 91 ) is set for 4/14/2026 at 10:00 a.m. in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor before Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. The hearing will be conducted in person. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 4/1/2026. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (vkdlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2026) (Entered: 04/01/2026)
Since we knew my schedule was going to be hectic since we’ve had a house full of people due to the Easter holiday, we went out of our way to provide coverage on the nightly show until such a time as we could sit down and do articles again.
Which is now, 4:16AM on Saturday morning. There’s a backlog of news stories to get out today, and we’ll be doing our best to get through the stack before losing Sunday to another family gathering. Welcome to Easter in America.
In his comments, Mr. Hudon-Huneault made it clear that he felt we were biased and that his viewers were better off getting the news about his trial from him and not from us. That’s fine, that’s his opinion, life goes on.
He apparently followed it up with more comments on Friday, ignoring the fact that we reported twice on the story. He apparently again chastised us for not reporting on the story, even though we were biased and not trustworthy.
Unfortunately, Mr. Hudon-Huneault made us part of that particular story. Ethically, as part of the story now, we have a bias. It’s the point we’ve made before. Journalism is about reporting the facts of the story, not becoming the star of the story. That’s why you’re reading or listening to an editorial instead of a news story.
We know it’s a quaint concept in the modern age of ME ME ME ME ME and look at me, but we’re old, this is what we were taught and what we stick to. Be part of the scenery and not the star of the show.
Others have different approaches to reporting, again, that’s fine. No matter how many times we’re “cancelled” because someone doesn’t like what we reported, we’re going to continue to report as objectively as we can.
So, will we stop covering the Cordova v. Hudon-Huneault lawsuit?
Nope.
There are only three channels covering the case right now, us, Hudon-Huneault and Merb. We’ve tried to remain objective in our reporting, and we’ll continue to remain as objective as possible in our reporting.
But we will have a bias. So please factor that in when you read or listen to future coverage of the lawsuit.
Will we be less scathing in our headlines and less snarky in our reporting?
Nope.
We’re going to continue to do what we’re doing. We’re going to continue to report and do our best to bring you the news as we can. That’s the promise we’ve made and the promise we’ll continue to honor until such time as we need to move on to something else.
We thank you for taking part of your day to spend with us, we apologize for the absolute silliness of this saga and will “do better” to do whatever it is we’ve been doing for the past two years on YouTube and four years now in print.
Best,
Jim Finch
Owner/Operator ReallyCoolNews
When I get my printed newspaper, it automatically updates the print edition on the minute, up to the minute!!! I say UP TO THE MINUTE!
Oh wait, sorry i must have fallen on my head there. You wrote a story. And it has had, and will alway have a publication time and date. If things change, as in new information comes out, if you are wrong, you will correct it and if you got it right the first time, you will still leave your story up for people to see and go back and see what you wrote.
JF We’ve tried to remain objective in our reporting, and we’ll continue to remain as objective as possible in our reporting.
OMG, you mean Objective journalism still exists? I guess it does, cause I read things here first. I follow the other channels as well but not for the whole story just their spin.
One slight correction however, You mention being one of three sites covering the story. In my not so humble opinion,, For a full and complete picture we should say you are one of five sites cover the story and again in my opinion, but 2 of the sites, stopped. One, cause he got hit with a Bar complaint and being a whiny little bitch talking all tough, when he was trying to intimidate people into his blackmail attempt, in my opinion, ran so fast, folded so fact he did not do the walk of shame he did the 100 meter huddle in 8 seconds, in my opinion. He was so fast to running away from everything he had said. The other channel. caught with his richard still in his mouth got dragged along and also removed everything. Again in my opinion.
Legal fact. Opinions are libious. Everyone has one. I just express mine.
Sue me.
Oh wait, that what they do… loser lolsuits for money to intimidate and scare people into given them money… in my opinion
Jim. You do what you do. When you get it wrong, you print a correction. When you get new information you post it. You try to be the objective voice of this community. Do you hit 100%, i be guessing no. But compare to EVERYONE else? you are by far the lead reporter around here.