[zahal724]

I have always had this question: If the press lies about someone, that is libel? If it is libel, they can be sued? If the press lies about someone in government, is that libel? If it is, can they be sued?

This may not be pertinent to this exact situation, but people like Clarke and Woodward would have a hard time lying. Also, if that's the case, wouldn't we have cleaner politics? I don't want to be naive, nevermind sound it, so can people tell me pros and cons if these were possible?

[NYCVirago]

I have always had this question: If the press lies about someone, that is libel? If it is libel, they can be sued? If the press lies about someone in government, is that libel? If it is, can they be sued?

IIRC, the press can often weasel their way out of libel suits by claiming that the person is a public figure, which means higher standards for judging whether the lies have caused damage. It's very difficult to win a libel suit, and even more difficult if you're famous. Carol Burnett was a rare exception to the rule.

[DallasMike]

Public figures in the US essentially cannot sue for libel. And who is a public figure? Virtually anyone that appears in the press. There are successful libel lawsuits every now and then -- some star whose name I forget successfully sued the National Enquirer a few years back -- but basically the press has carte blanche in this country.

The biggest way the press distorts the truth is by actually reporting what people say. John Kerry or Al Gore can stand up and say that Republicans want to starve children and the press will dutifully put in a headline even though they know that it's an untrue statement. The defense is that they're just reporting what someone said, so they get away with it.