Re:Courtroom “Feud” Leaves Accurate Speech About Celebrities...
by wildmusings on Sunday October 15, 2017 @07:11PM
(#15479874)
I share your general concern about preserving free speech. I'm fine with a standard that protects most lies. But I think Mr. Damore's case is one that should be over the legal line.
FWIW, there are free speech absolutists, like the late Justice Scalia, who nonetheless share my concern about weak libel laws.
How would you feel if the standard was lowered only for getting a court-mandated public apology, not monetary damages?
That's a good thing. Strong libel laws result in something even less desirable: a veritable free speech dystopia where they're used by the wealthy and powerful corporations alike to silence investigative journalism, for example.[0][1]
People blindly believing whatever they want to hear en massse from their favorite pundit or source is certainly one of the major challenges of our time, but it's not one that's best solved with stronger libel laws. Doing so would be tantamount to using nuclear weapons to solve poverty.
[0] https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/08/12/angola-defamation-laws-s...
[1] http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/03/21/394273902/o...