[TomGuy]

But the editorial contained factual errors, and jurors found that the former editor of the paper acted with “deliberate disregard” when they awarded Workman his damages.

Yet, the media doesn't see a problem.

Maybe this will awaken the media. Their misrepresentations of lies as truth is a 'deliberate disregard'. They should be held accountable when they persist in publishing lies, even after the truth has surfaced. Paging Dan Rather! Paging Dan Rather!

[rwfromkansas]

If you have factual errors, that is not libel, even if sloppy and careless editing led to the errors.

However, by printing a letter to the editor giving the correct story.....AND NOT EVEN BOTHERING TO CHECK AND SEE IF THAT LETTER WAS CORRECT AND THE EDITORIAL WAS NOT...it seems to me that that would be libel.

If they would have even bothered to pick up a phone and do some investigating to see if that letter was perhaps right, then if I was on the jury I would have given them a pass.

But, by not doing so, it seems pretty clear to be intentional disregard for the truth with the intent to harm the person in question.