The actual answer is just to sue them to shit and back to slander, libel, and public endangerment.
Accountability is the answer, not a lopsided policy that will destroy everyone when the pendulum swings back. Think: You want an Obama or an HRC doing this to conservative-leaning media?
Great response! Knee-jerk "ban them!" is so authoritarian. An unbiased media is important to an informed electorate. These corporate propagandists aren't news, and the law should be sufficient to dissolve their hegemony
Freedom of the press should not mean freedom to lie and control the population. It takes a massive, expensive, lawsuit that can prove direct, personal harm, to get back at them for lying. It really shouldn't. It should be a simple, and nearly immediate repercussion the moment it's proven they spread false information.
If that means they have to sideline a story and wait till ALL the facts are in before reporting? Good!
Abso-fucking-lutely NOT
The actual answer is just to sue them to shit and back to slander, libel, and public endangerment.
Accountability is the answer, not a lopsided policy that will destroy everyone when the pendulum swings back. Think: You want an Obama or an HRC doing this to conservative-leaning media?
Great response! Knee-jerk "ban them!" is so authoritarian. An unbiased media is important to an informed electorate. These corporate propagandists aren't news, and the law should be sufficient to dissolve their hegemony
Freedom of the press should not mean freedom to lie and control the population. It takes a massive, expensive, lawsuit that can prove direct, personal harm, to get back at them for lying. It really shouldn't. It should be a simple, and nearly immediate repercussion the moment it's proven they spread false information.
If that means they have to sideline a story and wait till ALL the facts are in before reporting? Good!
But US law isn't sufficient. We protect so much freedom of speech that our libel laws are weak.