New York Times v Sullivan

[@DesertJoshB]

The press should have to at least meet a burden of proof to be able to report. Even if it’s a small burden, it would put some faith back into what the media reports.

[@user-sb3du4oq8e]

So let’s say a particular media outlet puts a story out that comes from the DOJ website and a specific website put out by a police department that gave the media all the facts surrounding all facts involved in the case. Yet, this particular news outlet didn’t show all the facts provided which spun the story in a completely different way after omitting specific facts. The media outlet also did a public records request to have even more facts surrounding the incident explained and still refused to show all the facts in the story, placing the officers reputation in jeopardy amidst the community and placing the officer in danger if people contacted had seen the same story from the news outlet. Wouldn’t having all the facts and not presenting the facts show that the reporter knowingly falsely reported the story by omitting key facts to the incidents?

[@Moleinhole]

Just a question! What about the so called 1st amendment auditors that published a false video! Or video with false statements? 🤔🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Thanks