Quote:When lies, not errors mind you, get the same press protection afforded to all other material, then we've crossed a line. I remember Carol Burnette suing the National Enquirer for slander. As a public figure, she was fair game, but she won anyway. Some press actions are beyond the pale.Pretty sure when it's written down it's libel. Do we not have libel laws?
Quote:We send students through 12 years of primary and secondary education. At the end of that process, they should have been expected to acquire a working knowledge of the world they inhabit. That's not really true anymore. It was when I went to school, so I understand the difference. That's not the same as expecting in-depth knowledge of or even an interest in the subject matter.
To be perfectly honest, Dave, I think this is just self-indulgence on your part. I don't really see any evidence that people your age are any better at sorting through stuff than people mine. People are consistently dumb throughout their entire life cycle. Other than me, of course.
Quote:There is no need for a press overlord, or any other version of censorship, if the press is merely held to the standards of our slander laws. Lying with the intent to do harm is a form of assault. Causing harm by lying with no regard to the truth is a form of gross negligence. A lot of the alt-right press, and, as you noted, some of the MSM need a bit of slapping. Whether they get it depends on whether we still value truth as a public good or just a nice thing to have around.
So you think we should "open up those libel laws", then? Sounds like you and our fearless leader have something in common.