The key here is money. If UVA can afford it, they can wage a very expensive lawsuit that will financially cripple RS and the author.
An additional benefit would be the emails, postings, tweets, etc that discovery would bring to light. That would probably discredit RS, it’s editorial management and the author.
It wouldn’t matter whether the suit was wine or not. An example would be made and a message sent that there are repercussions for this sort of thing.
________________
I agree an apology doesn’t hack it.
In all worlds lawsuits and compensations are tracked and practices are changed depending on the out come of lawsuits.
Liability is a very strong motivator. So both the RS and the reporter need to be sued.
RS has been a mouthpiece for the ultra-left for many years disguised as MSM. Time to thrust the dagger deep into its heart.
Suing both RS and UVA will require the disclosure of the wench who made the false claim in print.
She's the one who has to worry about subsequent libel suits and how to pay for them, not UVA or RS........they have their own stable of lawyers.
Suing both RS and UVA will require the disclosure of the wench who made the false claim in print.
She's the one who has to worry about subsequent libel suits and how to pay for them, not UVA or RS........they have their own stable of lawyers.......
This time she will truly be screwed........