[Vigilanteman]

Years ago, when I was a Urinalism major, I took a course on libel and the law.

A libel charge cannot be applied when:

• The charge stems from clear parody of a public person, which Brian Ross clearly is.
  
• A private person, which Brian Ross clearly is not, makes themselves a public person by "thrusting themselves into a vortex of a public controversy". This particular case consisted of a private dentist suing for libel over a response to his letter to the editor.

Bottom line is the poster of the cartoon is thus protected by both rulings, even if Brian Ross enjoyed the greater protections of a private person.

[Nervous Tick]

Thx for the info.

From the way the media behaves nowadays, I bet they don’t teach that “libel” course anymore. They probably dropped it as a required course when they added the course on “LBGT journalists — which bathroom should they use?”

>> A private person, which Brian Ross clearly is not, makes themselves a public person by “thrusting themselves into a vortex of a public controversy”.

I don’t know why but that description, apt as it is, really makes me chuckle. I know I’d like to thrust a few of them “urinalists” into the vortex of a public meatgrinder. :-)