I do not see what details are missing or what additional clarity is needed. The OP identifies a specific event in which the OP asserts that ma media outlet had publicly lied. The OP asks if such events are not illegal because of these lies, which, the OP asserts, mislead viewers/listeners.
That seems perfectly clear, and has sufficient details to give an objective answer. The OP does not specify a jurisdiction, and the answers might be different in different jurisdictions. But our policy is, i think clear that in such cases answers may be provided for any jurisdiction, and this is not a reason to close.
None of the users listed as making the close left any comment asking for any particular detail to be added, or for any point to be clarified. Indeed no one left any such message. While the site rules do not require such a comment, I think leaving one is good practice, particularly when the OP is a new contributor. How else is the OP supposed to know what needs clarification? A "needs details or clarity" close is supposed to invite the OP to improve the question, but in a case like this how is the OP supposed to do that without some guidance?
I here ask any or all of those who are listed as closers (or any other user) to indicate what additional details or clarity would be needed to make this a valid question, in each of their views.