Backed by DeSantis, lawmakers look to gut press freedom. It might not stop in Florida

The Miami Herald ^ | February 25, 2023 | BY JAY WEAVER AND ANA CEBALLOS

[Oldeconomybuyer]

[mfish13]

It’s the Miami Herald, Jake. Nothing but BS.

[AndyJackson]

that protect the freedom of the press to report on politicians and other powerful public figures.

You mean like protecting them from libel and slander, e.g. protecting them from lies, fabrications, falsifications and malicious misrepresentation? Those sorts of protections of freedoms of the press?

[TexasPaul]

They write like the bill is a bad thing?

[euram]

We can’t have the media telling the truth, which runs directly counter to their business model.

[BenLurkin]

What “media trying to pull back the curtain on the dealings of elected officials”?

The so-called “news” media covers up the Democrat Party corruption.

[Spok]

Freedom is slavery. When the left talks about freedom, that’s what they mean.

[ConservativeInPA]

The bill would make it easier to sue media outlets for allegations of defamation and make it harder for journalists to do their jobs by undermining the use of unnamed sources, an important reporting leftist misinformation and propaganda tool

Fixed it.

[sauropod]

Read the excerpt.

It comes across to me as so.much bullsqueeze.

[Striperman]

Anytime unnamed sources are quoted the story is b.s

[Wayne07]

“legal standards in place for more than a half century” - “interest to reevaluate that bedrock legal principle.”

50 year old “bedrock” principles, eh? Inviolable wisdom from our founding fathers in the 60s? SOrry Miami Herald, you lie and you will lose.

[Hojczyk]

The paper is the same as the DNC…

Like all newspapers…that no one reads anymore…

The problem is the GOP is useless at the federal level…owned by China

[Rockingham]

Quite true. I have had reporters and editors -- at least twice with the Miami Herald -- admit to me that a story about Democratic corruption or misconduct was true but would not run because of an "editorial decision."

[alstewartfan]

ONE MORE BIG LIE

[AndyTheBear]

The right to the press to maliciously lie about public figures is in jeapordy? What can the press do? Do we expect them to just do honest journalism? This is horrible!

[lastchance]

“Many First Amendment advocates and legal experts say it is clearly intended to muzzle reporters who serve as watchdogs for the public.”

Translation: “We found a guy who agrees with our bias.” The law would not apply to actual journalists. Which is why they are worried.

[qaz123]

Isn’t there some accepted notion s that the lady who owned the Washington Post squashed all sorts of stories about those clowns in DC, to protect them?

[BitWielder1]

They have no problems gutting press freedom for conservatives but the scream like a chastened bully when someone is trying to set things straight.

[cockroach_magoo]

Freedom is slavery.

This is the view of those who want the freedom to own slaves.

Indeed, the major media outlets want their readership to be their slaves.

[j.havenfarm]

Yes. Those types of things. New York Times v Sullivan was wrongly decided. In a society supposedly based on checks and balances, what is essentially the unavailability of defamation leaves no check on agendized “reporting.” We’re an anomaly in common law countries and this proposed statute might provide an opportunity for SCOTUS to overturn Sullivan