Do you really want the government courts to make the final determination of who is correct and who is incorrect on controversial news stories. The courts have ruled that public figures can only sue for libel in very clearcut cases. That is because we don’t want the government ruling what types of political speech are true or false.
A newspaper story is not political speech. Oh, they can repeat what a candidate said, but to make something up out of whole cloth and say, “anonymous this and sources that” is something altogether different. Add in the fact that the media are simply corporate, globalist handmaidens and you have a specific issue. Personally, I think bringing it to light is fine and if they ever address it - don’t hold your breathe - then fine too.
Well said.
Political speech needs to stay protected.
“The courts have ruled that public figures can only sue for libel in very clearcut cases. “
I take it you don’t think much of what the MSM does is “clearcut libel?”
I guess you don’t watch the nightly news! Then you have Duke La Crosse, and the recent Fraternity closing (at whatever U) driven by Rolling Stone. I guess those are not libel either? Everyone in those cases ( except the crooked DA in NC) escaped justice. So eve non-public figures don’t get their wrongs addressed in court today.