I would add that this "flexibility" also lends itself very well to motte-and-bailey defenses: When pressed to justify such a law - say e.g. libel - you can draw

I would add that this "flexibility" also lends itself very well to motte-and-bailey defenses: When pressed to justify such a law - say e.g. libel - you can draw up some gross, obvious offenses that fall under the law, ideally with the audience as the victim ("imagine someone walked around the neighborhood and was telling everyone you murdered someone"), giving you broad support. What you don't tell is what other, much more murkier circumstances would also be covered by the law - e.g. journalists publishing well-researched allegations of corruption.