WE ARE JOURNALISTS, TOO
The U.S. Ninth Circuit court of appeals issued a ruling earlier this month likely to have far-reaching implications on new media.
In addressing a defamation case brought against a blogger, the court ruled that websites like this one enjoy the same constitutional protections as newspapers and other media outlets when it comes to the content they publish.
“What First Amendment protections are afforded a blogger sued for defamation?” the court asked. “We hold that liability for a defamatory blog post involving a matter of public concern cannot be imposed without proof of fault and actual damages.”
In other words, blog posts (like newspaper articles) will be held to the same “actual malice” standard first articulated in the court’s landmark 1964 Times v. Sullivan ruling. Which means blog posts can only be found libelous or defamatory if the author had a priori “knowledge that the information was false” or published the information “with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
To prove that the court must go inside the mind of the defendant … a next-to-impossible task.
For bloggers, here’s the critical section of the ruling …
The protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others’ writings, or tried to get both sides of a story. As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable.
Translation?
Be afraid … be very afraid.
50 comments
Good, fuck the cockroaches up their asses even harder now. Many of us are rooting for you.
Who would have thought you’d agree with a decision coming from the 9th circuit?
Are those the gloves you wear when your giving yourself a stranger?
I am better than a “stranger.”
Really? You still wear your hat like that? AND you want us to take you seriously?
I’d bet money he has a #7 USC football jersey that he wears to football games..and out to eat as well.
Jerseys I own: No. 55 Kenny Powers Myrtle Beach Mermen, No. 19 University of South Carolina (2013 football), No. 27 Chicago Blackhawks Jeremy Roenick, No. 10 New York Giants Eli Manning, No. 8 Baltimore Orioles Cal Ripken, Jr., No. 16 Kansas City Royals Bo Jackson, No. 40 University of South Carolina (2009 football), No. 1 University of South Carolina (baseball), No. 18 Indianapolis Colts Peyton Manning (2006) No. 18 Indianapolis Colts Peyton Manning (2001), No. 12 Indianapolis Colts Andrew Luck (2013) …
SIC, is that a USC diploma in the background? I thought all of us alums from USC could not write or spell well?
I bet these go great with jeans and dinner at Red Lobster….
Sorry, just think grown men wearing sports jerseys is odd. Ultimate wannabe move.
Yeah, that picture sucks. That said, the 9th Circuit came down on the right side of things. Imagine the implications if receiving First Amendment media protections required some sort of credentialing agency blessing from the government.
ha! yes thank God for my kids they look like Mrs. Sic …
Well, I guess this means no one can taunt Haley into suing you now.
Good ruling on the court’s part.
I had no idea Fred Durst was running this site. At least we know what he’s been doing since “break stuff”.
The Sullivan case was specifically targeted against Conservatives, so the liberal media could savage them, and it would be all but impossible to defend…
The left was (is) like McCarthy in 1964…but they were calling everyone (and everything) criminally racist..as they do now..The ruling just allowed them to get away with it, regardless of truth and validity…
The current libel law is WAY too liberal. And good people are harmed, unjustly by the filthy and immoral.
If libel laws were fair, the journalism business would be a lot cleaner than it has become since the liberals have owned it.
The power of the left is why we have an anti-American president, who is destroying the best of our nation…
You whore!!! Yeah, the right would never libel anyone…
I’m willing to let the same laws apply to all..Yet your opposition to decency,fairness and justice indicts you for what you are. .
“The bigger the bra size the smaller the IQ.” If you were female, I bet you would have a hard time getting on your feet by Rush’s assessment.
Sic Willie’s “thinking man” pose.
I have not read the ruling but it seems like you are misinterpreting it.
No libel without proof of fault and damages is the standard in ANY libel/slander. The Times v Sullivan standard of actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth applies only when publication carries assertions against a public official. A later case gave that standard in cases requiring public figures.
If you publish something defamatory against Joe Schmoe, he doesn’t have to get inside your sleazy little head.
And trademarks that you revel in, such as unfair, imbalanced can be used when a public figure/official sues, to begin stepping inside your intent.
THIS more than anything is what makes the MSM cautious. Truth is still the absolute defense in most cases, but there have been cases where the truth did nit set anyone free.
If MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA (check your spelling on that) means you think you got a ticket to the land of no consequences, you are indeed going to be dangerous. To your family.
Damages are presumed in your typical Joe Schmoe case when the defamation is actionable per se — meaning when the defamation concerns a person’s reputation, whether they have a loathesome disease, are a whore, etc.
No, damages have to have an actual monetary value that can be attached in some way.
I could cite cases for you but you are wrong. If you tell everyone that Joe Schmoe, a mechanic, is a crook who overbills for repairs, and if he wins on liability, the damage to his reputation is presumed. He does not need to prove, for example, that he lost business because of what you said.
If the “journalist” was charged with proving the truth of what he publishes..would FITS walk free (Haley, Scott Wingo)…. ???
If the rules that govern libel were applied to murder, all the killer would have to say is i did not murder w/ any malice, regardless of the result…and there could be no conviction…
Or the murderer could simply say I did not intend to kill the victim..and he walks…
Tell Wingo to sue me.
The law is unjustly tipped in your favor. He has not a chance.
Liberals are free to tear down….and dare the targets to sue..because liberal judges will run interference for the immoral and indecent…
You see: Liberalism must lie…or it would never get more than 30% of the vote.
Are you talking about that poor boy in Florida who was killed by that nice man guarding the neighborhood?
That was a libel case???…you are a typical liberal…a F*#kin idiot..
I read where you posted “If the rules that govern libel were applied to murder, all the killer would have to say is..”. I replied with a reference to a murder case in which the defendant made claims similar to your suggestion.
Forgive me, GT. I should know better than to pick on you, but sometimes I can’t resist. It is because you are so outrageously and consistently stupid. There is something about it that draws me in and makes me do it. I’m not proud and my friends would not approve of it. But what the hell, it is the internet.
Zimmerman’s intent was to blow Trayvon’s @$$ to kingdom come because Trayvon was going MMA on him…
Zimmerman was found not guilty, clearly, on the grounds of self-defense, you Dumb-@$$….he fulfilled his intent…
It’s nice to see that the Constitution still works. It ain’t dead yet!
Yep, that’s 1 for 100, it’s making a comeback!
…but then the 9th is the most reversed court in the country!!
Now, to get to the real story, how does this affect us commentators on Fitsnews? As I understand it, Will has no ownership, control, or editorial privileges regarding Disqus, which is provided as a mechanism for posting our comments.
That probably leaves us vulnerable because of some of the outrageous comments posted here. Banter amongst ourselves would be exempt because we volunteered to sign in to this forum. Getting shoved, insulted, or pissed on by others is ok because we can give it right back — sort of like being in a pillow fight.
I love pillow fights and pillow biters. Time to get our “manly” on boys and have at it!
*poof*
I just tagged you shifty you silly boy!
Hmmmmm – apparently that didn’t read right, so I’ll have to cure that error.
You do know what Liberace thinks is even more fabulous than a candelabra on his piano?
Tulips on his organ…
*rimshot*
The gay guy goes to his proctologist for a routine examination. The doctor gets him in position and is surprised to find a piece of string dangling from his ass. He pulls gently on the string and out pops a lovely bouquet of flowers.
“Do you know I just pulled a dozen roses out of your rectum?” asks the astonished doctor.
“Is that so?” said his patient. “Who’re they from?”
The gay guy goes to his proctologist for a routine examination. The doctor gets him in position and is surprised to find a piece of string dangling from his ass. He pulls gently on the string and out pops a lovely bouquet of flowers.
“Do you know I just pulled a dozen roses out of your rectum?” asks the astonished doctor.
“Is that so?” said his patient. “Who’re they from?”
But that is not the way it works on this site. Certain posters think they own this site and they’ll do everything in their power to censor you and drum you off the site if you ruffle their feathers – and the rest of their little clique comes along and votes them up for their efforts.
Feeling a bit paranoid tonight SCBlues? Perhaps you missed your med schedule?
I love the little weenies on here that have to use some disguise to make their posts. And what an adult and astute comment about “meds” – you belong on the teeny-bopper threads as that is all they talk about.
You still mad at me, Cuz?
I hardly recognize you when you do not post in your affected speech referring to yourself in the third person – you really ought to keep that up so folks will know how smart you are – so mind rephrasing, Cuz?
Touche’.
You still mad at TBG, Cuz? ; )
Would you be referring to..??
From Nikki’s speech —
“To that I would simply say that a child who cannot read at the level of his or her peers is already damaged socially” — GrandTango got a mention!
VOTES THEM UP? Oh, dear sweet Lord Jesus! Not the universally dreaded gang-vote-up!!!!!
Fuck that noise! Does not amount to a popcorn fart in a hurricane. Something that I’ve experienced myself — and lived to tell the tale.
shave. you look like a bum
The question that comes to mind is: Whose bum are you anyway?
Turn the picture on the wall 45 degrees to the right and you have the GrandeTurnip hitting himself in the head with a brick.