3 ms·
My mistake, you're correct, it would be the campaign and not the government that might be held liable. The point still stands: if you think that voters can hol
by bhupy 7y ago
My mistake, you're correct, it would be the campaign and not the government that might be held liable.
The point still stands: if you think that voters can hold a campaign liable for not fulfilling campaign promises, I wish you...all the best in making that case.
Likewise, if the New York Times publishes information that's later found to be incorrect, and does not publish a retraction, I wish you all the best in pursuing legal action against them.
This was tried in NYTimes v Sullivan, and the NYTimes ended up triumphant. You'd have to prove "actual malice", the burden for which is high enough to be mostly infeasible.
In any case, it would never be Facebook that would have to facilitate this kind of legal action. Any sort of legal action would have to be between the individual/group that originated such a post, and the individual/group that wishes to seek damages for "misinformation". Facebook is just the medium.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago> if you think that voters can hold a campaign liable I see no reason why they would be any less successful than other FTC enforcements. > This was tried in NYTimes v Sullivan, and the NYTimes ended up triumphant. If there's no law against it, I don't see why they shouldn't be. > In any case, it would never be Facebook that would have to facilitate this kind of legal action. I never said they would. I argued against the slippery slope objection to enforcing truthful advertising.