[PLKIng]

I remeber when Carol Burnett sued the National Enquirer for calling her a drunk and won. So, there are some limits to waht they can say but it is pretty broad. Isn’t it funny that the Enquirer almost seems like a reputable rag compared to the media of today?

[ArmstedFragg]

Essentially, they have to know it's false and publish it anyway. The lawyer's letter is an effort to foreclose anyone claiming they didn't know it was false. Actual malice is the relevant phrase. Google NY Times v. Sullivan for details.

It's a chess game, she just answered the first move.