View Single Post
12-25-2009, 05:26 AM
Bryzgalov's Blueline
CS's Avatar
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by captainpaxil View Post
liable and defamation of character are very real threats to consider for an online reporter. so far as i know they arent protected under pennsylvania shield law and even then in order to publish even the rags like the enquirer need to be able to present a case for reasonable believability. the absence of notes tapes and/or failure to produce a witness would constitute failure of due diligence on his part and lose him the case. for him to win a libel suit he needs to prove the intention of satire (umm see i put an e5 next to it) or that somewhere on his site there is a for entertainment purposes only tag. otherwise hed be held to the news standard which means he would need to either source the rumor or prove its believability. i heard it from my buddy and printed it as news is a recipe for disaster as a libel defense.

lisa hartnell and carter both have a case and its a rather easy one to make all you have to do is show publication and proof of distress. if they can show an obvious malicious intent it doesnt even matter if the rumors were true. the problem is that most libel suits tend to end in a retraction and teh damage from this one has already been done.
This is correct. The Temple senior is in for one wild ride on this one. He made a HUGE mistake.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote