"A.True.Boater" wrote in message
...
On 2/14/11 8:09 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlehpKdndk0H9duusTQnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Supporting the first amdendmenet is a problem for you?

So, you think there is a first amendment right to knowingly and
deliberately publish a falsified "news report" that destroys someone's
professional reputation without having to face the consequences?

Breitbart published that crap with malice aforethought. I hope the woman
gets a multi-million-dollar award or settlement out of his hide.

The mainstream media does it all of the time.

There is a difference between a news media making an editorial comment and
presenting news that would be considered libelous. It will be interesting
to see how this plays out, but if it is shown that the publisher of the
report was aware that the edited video did not accurately reflect her
comments and that the report was published with malice intent, his defense
time will have the their hands full to minimize the damage.

I am all for news media being held accountable for libel. Every time I
read the tabloid headlines at the supermarket, I wish more people sued
their asses off.


Trust me, we will read more about this as it progresses.


Why no mention of the turd that actually fired her. Seems like he might have
jumped the gun a little.

--
Ziggy®