posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 11:19 PM
Be careful what you ask for. Here in the U,S. a newspaper (or any media) can be sued for printing lies only if it can be proved they did so
"maliciously", that is, they knew it was a lie and printed it anyway. Proving this, of course, is almost impossible. The newspaper is in possession
of all the evidence of their own malice. The system was designed to protect newspapers at the expense of the reputations of ordinary men.
This is what ended dueling in the U.S. If a reporter lied about a Southern man, he might find himself challenged to a duel. After several were
killed, or ran away in disgrace, the northern newspapers mounted a campaign to get dueling stopped. The death of Alexander Hamilton served as the
British media may be sued for printing lies. However, the british media has found ways to circumvent the law. They create code-names for public
figures; such as "Jack Straw" for Tony Blair, and then lie about Jack Straw all they like. It's almost impossible to prove connection to the
code-name in a court of law.
A free press is a malicious, superficial, hobgoblin. It's often controlled by the type of people you would not walk across the street to spit on.
But........the only thing worse is a state-controlled press.