Fred's Myth
Nonhyphenated American
They have been given the chance to retract and publicly apologize, which is the bare minimum.
Failing that, lawsuits ARE a viable option that hasn't been taken off the table.
MAGA HATS MEDIA BIAS
- Thread starter Wally
- Start date
Failing that, lawsuits ARE a viable option that hasn't been taken off the table.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
It doesn't.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
I don't think Wapo needs them they have their own lawyers. Freedom of the press is pretty basic stuff anyways.
Ask the newspapers and networks who settled with Richard Jewell for millions. You can't make false allegations against anyone just because you're a journalist. First Amendment doesn't apply.
oldngray
nowhere special
Usually they can get away with it by a quick but useless retraction that is barely reported. Obviously intentional but they are trying to generate news to sell papers.
The media was warned and given a chance but if ignored a lawsuit has an excellent chance of winning.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Here's the thing my friend.
I asked you to source a WAPO quote that you think is libelous. You can't seem to do it.
So at this point it seems like you're just a snowflake crying that life isn't fair.
As was pointed out already by I think OldnGray all that stuff was pulled down. But I saw it when it was up. As a matter of fact I believe a number of folks here were ripping those MAGA hat kids. No one cares what you think, but that you and liberals everywhere were going berserk was because outlets like WAPO were saying you should go berzerk. Another overreach by liberals. George Zimmerman, remember him? He got a big payday. Richard Jewell. Y'all destroyed that cop's career in Ferguson, MO when all he did was defend himself. Don't know if he got any money though. The politically correct lynch mob keeps getting things blown up in their faces.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
So you got nothing. Figures.
You can't sue a newspaper for reporting the news, no matter how much your wittle feelings get hurt snowflake.
They can't be malicious in their reporting. I know that's not a concept you understand but they'll understand it shortly.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
They weren't.
If you can point me to an article by WAPO that you think was malicious to the kid, I'm open to hear your opinion. But you can't seem to do that.
Until then you're just another useful idiot in Trump's war on the media.
Non sequitur
Well-Known Member
So I couldn't falsely accuse you and defame your good name but the media can do whatever they want. Who the hell would want to be president then when all the real power is in Media. Sounds like collusion
Well useless, at least I'm useful!
El Correcto
god is dead
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964),[1] was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the actual malicestandard that must be met for press reports about public officials to be considered libel.[2] The decision defended free reporting of the civil rights campaignsin the southern United States. It is one of the key decisions supporting the freedom of the press. The actual malice standard requires that a plaintiff alleging defamation who is a public official or public figure prove that the publisher of the statement in question knew that the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity. Because of the extremely high burden of proof on the plaintiff, and the difficulty of proving the defendant's knowledge and intentions, such claims by public figures rarely prevail.
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan - Wikipedia
This is why our press is garbage.
This is why we get hit piece after hit piece in the media and not actual news.
It’s a license to print fake news.
Fred's Myth
Nonhyphenated American
Public official or Public figure doesn’t apply in this situation.
The whole country could save a lot of time and money by letting @DriveInDriveOut decide these cases. He can judge instantly purely by utilizing his opinion.
The whole country could save a lot of time and money by letting @DriveInDriveOut decide these cases. He can judge instantly purely by utilizing his opinion.
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
Wrong.
If a newspaper knowingly printed false and defamatory information, they could and should be sued for libel.
But, that’s not what’s happening.
Trump cries like a toddler about this all the time, but point me toward the newspaper articles that have included information that the publisher knew to be false.
I’ll wait.
Authoritarianism 101:
Delegitimize the free-press, call them the ‘enemy of the people’.
Call for restrictions on valid media.
Explain that El Jefe is the only person that can be trusted.
Explain that El Jefe is the only possible person to fix everything.
Lie repeatedly and so often that citizens have no idea which is up or down.
Embrace a fictional ‘other’ that is the source of all society’s ills.
Attack said ‘other’ relentlessly, in order to stir it up.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
Don’t believe the hype, Orange Julius is trying (and succeeding, evidently) to distract you from his nepotism, his profiteering, his weakening of allies and promotion of foes, his endless broken and false promises, etc.
The funny/sad thing is that Trump is just a vessel. I’m fairly certain he has no idea what’s going on, but people in power positions are more than happy to let him be the ‘idiot on the shelf’ while they institute their agenda.
If Trump wasn’t such a blowhard narcissist, he might have been a good President...instead, he thinks he’s in charge but he’s getting rolled by...what’s the term?
Oh yeah, the ‘deep state’.
Anyway, Trump would love nothing more than to criminalize the ‘Press’ because he’s so butthurt that they reprint his actual words and show the lies/contradictions.
It’s hilarious, the guy is a cardboard cutout authoritarian wannabe.
Rant over.
P
pickup
Guest
Wow , it’s like you were there even if you weren’t .
Non sequitur
Well-Known Member
But in reality the current media sucks. Public radio might well be radio Moscow. I can't believe our tax dollars fund this garbage.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
DIDO: "You can't prove anything."
ME: "They've removed all the offensive material. "
DIDO: "See, you can't prove anything. I'm brilliant."
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
You are making a ridiculous claim you can't back up with anything.
Everytime I ask for details you rant about how the internet bullied him.
Yawn.
You got nothing.
