4 ms·
That is interesting. So... basically we are waiting until they get their fact checking wrong against a wrong person? This must happen eventually. But you cou
by lmilcin 5y ago
That is interesting.
So... basically we are waiting until they get their fact checking wrong against a wrong person?
This must happen eventually.
But you could argue that so many public persons openly lie and even declare that "they can lie to public since they are not under oath", that it is hard to punish a company that tries to do right by fact checking a lot of falsehoods. It is reasonable to assume that when you correct a million falsehoods you will make some mistakes.
- thugthrasher 5y agoTo be clear, if it's a public figure, then just getting the fact checking wrong is not enough to be defamation. There has to be "actual malice" which BASICALLY just means they knew they were wrong or should have known they were wrong. If they can show that they were just following the information that was publicly available then they can make mistakes without losing a lawsuit.
- ttyprintk 5y agoCertain famous persons are expected to lie, so it wouldn’t injure their reputation in the way that (the above) defamation is defined. A politician, for example, might pursue such a case only for publicity.