3 ms·
Re: the last paragraph above: Politicians, in the U.S. at least, are treated differently because they are public figures in areas of the law around slander and
by xpe 4y ago
Re: the last paragraph above: Politicians, in the U.S. at least, are treated differently because they are public figures in areas of the law around slander and libel.*
From Wikipedia's entry on public figure:
> A public figure is a person who has achieved notoriety, prominence or fame within a society, whether through achievement, luck, action, or in some cases through no purposeful action of their own.
> In the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy, a public figure cannot succeed in a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements in the United States unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice by knowing the falsity or by reckless disregard for the truth. The legal burden of proof in defamation actions is thus higher in the case of a public figure than in the case of an ordinary person.
- logicalmonster 4y agoThat's a fair point to add, but note that I specifically mentioned that this is a problem for countries without freedom of speech protections. In the US, we're semi-protected from government interference with this level of free speech that is critical of public figures, though technology firms have the capability of deciding what content is allowed on their platforms and can still provide some form of censorship if they choose to for various real or artificial reasons.
- xpe 4y agoRight, I wasn't disagreeing. Just elaborating. Yes, I saw your point about freedom of speech protections.