2 ms·

yeah i m talking about the case when it's a lie (which is what stossel claims). Also it seems the case you mention applies to public officials or people running

• cjensen 5y ago
  The category isn't public "officials or people running for office." If you carefully read the preceding comments, you'll see that "public persons" is the phrase that was used. I think perhaps you read the "public" part and misunderstood what the phrase means in legal writing. In legal writing, it's a bit nebulous as mentioned, but includes well-known people commenting on matters, people who become unintentionally well-known for their thoughts, in addition to the obvious stuff like politicians. Host of a nationwide broadcast? 100% a public person and not even close. It's a dumb lawsuit and a good lawyer would have told Stossel as much.
  • cblconfederate 5y ago
    according to the wiki of the referenced case > it held that if a plaintiff in a defamation lawsuit is a public official or person running for public office, not only must he or she prove the normal elements of defamation—publication of a false defamatory statement to a third party—he or she must also prove that the statement was made with "actual malice", But as i understand it is now being applied to celebrities as well TBH i only know stossel from his twitter and videos that i see in libertarian channels (i m not in the US). Didn't know he was so famous in the US. I wonder whether that (international audience) counts for defining what is "public official"
    • setpatchaddress 5y ago
      Formerly famous. He's one of those formerly small-L libertarians like Dennis Miller who took hard right turns after 9/11.