>>Please look up the specific legal meaning of libel. This isn't libel. It's distortion, it's cant, it's malicious partisanship, it's sloppy journalism but it isn't libel. Even if it was libel, the way the law is written you have to prove "malice." That's nearly impossible unless you can find one of those mind-readers who can sort out "hate crimes" from regular crimes of the same kind.<<
True and incorrect !
Alright, that misleding headline is not LIBEL .
And in the case of Libel, you do not have to prove malice !
Only that the VERBATIM quote is false, in short- if you say you heard such-in-such party make this statement 'to you' and they did not- you committed libel .
In defamation of character, or slander, then you have to prove malice !
Marc, libel IS defamation of character, by definition: "libel: noun, The expression of injurious, malicious statements about someone; verb: To make defamatory statements about."
I think you'd agree Ann Coulter is a public figure, so read on -- carefully.
In re: "malice":
"malice: n. a conscious, intentional wrongdoing either of a civil wrong like libel (false written statement about another) or a criminal act like assault or murder, with the intention of doing harm to the victim. This intention includes ill-will, hatred or total disregard for the other's well-being. Often the mean nature of the act itself implies malice, without the party saying "I did it because I was mad at him, and I hated him," which would be express malice. Malice is an element in first degree murder. In a lawsuit for defamation (libel and slander) the existence of malice may increase the judgment to include general damages. Proof of malice is absolutely necessary for a "public figure" to win a lawsuit for defamation."
Source: http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1197&bold=%7C%7C%7C%7C