Rumors of Obama invading Texas cause fear

[uebermann]

[Winchester]

Well... some people believed War of the Worlds was real when it was broadcast.

[fstarcstar]

I agree Uber. Any walk between aisles at a grocery store will give you at least 3-5 different "news" organizations. I kid you not one day in East Texas (gulp) I saw a woman in front of me in the store and she looked at a national enquirer magazine that said "OBAMA IS GAY, Michelle is devastated" and showed a picture of Michelle Obama with her hands over her face. This woman pointed to the magazine and literally said to her husband, "Oh my god Obama is gay" and started talking to him about it. I thought those kinds of things were accepted as complete crap or satire, apparently not. I also blame social media and the internet in general for circulating topics such as this.

You gotta remember Uber, Jerry Springer once said 10% of the US population would be willing to be on his show when they ran a study. So at best we have around 30 million people that aren't coherent functioning members of society. We are f**k.

[exploited]

Most Western countries don't allow the sort of libel that you guys do, and so blatant falsehoods are not commonly passed around. SCOTUS long ago ruled that so long as a media organization doesn't admit to lying, they are pretty much free to print whatever - while there are laws on the books against defamation, the aggrieved party must prove that the defendant:

1. Published or otherwise broadcast an unprivileged, false statement of fact about the plaintiff;

2. Caused material harm to the plaintiff by publishing or broadcasting said false statement of fact;

3. Acted either negligently or with actual malice.

The three together are near impossible to prove... And how would one quantify a material harm against a public figure like Obama? In the case of public figures, the standard is actual malice... Which makes it that much harder, yet again.

[John Galt]

[exploited]

[John Galt]

again i really don't see how it's relevant. the government can't sue you for defamation of the government, period. i mean some less free countries might lock such people up in a dungeon but that doesn't really sound like something we americans want.

as for the op's contention that "conservatives" are to blame for a loss of decorum, this stuff isn't novel. american politics has had this stuff since before we were america

[Philly]

I agree that there should be no way to go after the press or individuals for defamation of the government. Even if it's the most blatantly dishonest and toxic bullshit ever, protecting those responsible for it is better than the alternative of allowing people to face legal consequences for defamation of the government. The possible ramifications of having it otherwise are very scary.

[eynon81]

[eynon81]