Trump's Opposition to Freedom of the Press...

[Sunstone]

“One of the things I’m gonna do, and this is only gonna make it tougher for me, and I’ve never said this before, but one of the things I’m gonna do if I win… is I’m gonna open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re gonna open up those libel laws.

“With me, they’re not protected, because I’m not like other people…We’re gonna open up those libel laws, folks, and we’re gonna have people sue you like you never get sued before.” -- Donald Trump

[Source]

The source is an opinion piece that directly quotes Trump and provides video documentation of its quotes.

Seems like Trump isn't much for Freedom of the Press -- and by extension, Free Speech. Does anyone believe he can "open up the libel laws" to allow lawsuits "like you never get sued before" without that shutting down the core freedoms of the press and speech in this country? If so, what is your reasoning?

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

He referring to gutter press ? Outright lies to sell newspapers , can ruin an innocent .
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmcumeds/362/36205.htm

 

[Altfish]

I despise Trump but I agree with him on this issue. Freedom of the Press comes with responsibilities and if the press deliberately publish lies then there should be the opportunity for redress.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some thoughts on the article........

The author, HH, makes this claim.....

“I’m not like other people.” Actually, the United States Constitution says you are exactly like other people, because under the Constitution, we are all equal before the law. There is no Donald Trump Exception clause anywhere to be found. Even the Founding Fathers had to take their lumps from their critics.

But if one listens to the video, DT claims he's different because he doesn't take their money.
The claim looks pretty false by ignoring what Trump intended.

Trump comes out opposing business influencing the media for personal gain. This seems much more of a liberal stance. Moreover, there is a problem that the media can skirt campaign finance laws with "in kind" contributions in the exempt form of selective coverage.

Suing for libel when news media make demonstrably false claims is difficult because it's next to impossible to show quantified damages. If he wants to change the law in this area, he's in for a real uphill battle. There is merit in making media more accountable for demonstrably false claims, but this doesn't seem to be an attack on the First Amendment.

 

[fantome profane]

[Source]

The source is an opinion piece that directly quotes Trump and provides video documentation of its quotes.

Seems like Trump isn't much for Freedom of the Press -- and by extension, Free Speech. Does anyone believe he can "open up the libel laws" to allow lawsuits "like you never get sued before" without that shutting down the core freedoms of the press and speech in this country? If so, what is your reasoning?

This stupid ******** thinks he is running for the office of Emperor of the Universe. He thinks he is going to remake the world in his own image. The reality is that he is only running for President of the United States. He is not going to get what he wants but he is going to do a lot of damage throwing a infantile tantrum because of it.


(go ahead Mr. Drumpf, sue me)

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I despise Trump but I agree with him on this issue. Freedom of the Press comes with responsibilities and if the press deliberately publish lies then there should be the opportunity for redress.

Isn't that what current libel laws permit or encourage: the pursuit of redress against false claims? Trump apparently wants to widen the libel laws so people (notably him) can sue people for saying anything negative about him. Hence why he wants to "open them up".

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

[Source]

The source is an opinion piece that directly quotes Trump and provides video documentation of its quotes.

Seems like Trump isn't much for Freedom of the Press -- and by extension, Free Speech. Does anyone believe he can "open up the libel laws" to allow lawsuits "like you never get sued before" without that shutting down the core freedoms of the press and speech in this country? If so, what is your reasoning?

I think it can be reasonably guaranteed that if Obama had said something like this the American Right would've had a collective stroke from all the outrage. Coupled with the fact that Trump is quick to lambast minority ethnicities like Hispanics & blacks on no rational basis, but doesn't want to judge the KKK until he has more evidence to look at - we should be worried at the possibility he might make it into the Oval Office.

 

[Revoltingest]

Isn't that what current libel laws permit or encourage: the pursuit of redress against false claims? Trump apparently wants to widen the libel laws so people (notably him) can sue people for saying anything negative about him. Hence why he wants to "open them up".

This is a conclusion one might draw from the article's author.
But if one listens to the supplied video, one hear's "negative & false".
I infer that being false is a necessary condition.
Looking at the website....it's pro-Democrat & anti-Republican.
(They even advertise "Real Liberal Politics".)
We can expect things to be spun toward this end.

 

[fantome profane]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/29/media/donald-trump-journalists-presidential-candidates/

Look at Donald Drumpf's general attitude towards the press. He bullies the media that attend his rallies. He pens them up, points to them and calls them scum.

Look at how the Drumpf handles protesters, has them violently ejected, says he would like to punch them.

This is not a man who wants to protect freedom of the press or freedom of expression. This is a fascist wannabe wimp who is afraid of Megan Kelly.

 

[Deathbydefault]

[Source]

The source is an opinion piece that directly quotes Trump and provides video documentation of its quotes.

Seems like Trump isn't much for Freedom of the Press -- and by extension, Free Speech. Does anyone believe he can "open up the libel laws" to allow lawsuits "like you never get sued before" without that shutting down the core freedoms of the press and speech in this country? If so, what is your reasoning?

So long as it is only to stop people from giving out false statistics, false facts, purposefully misleading information, etc. I don't see an issue.
It would only cross the line if it took away the presses ability to hold an opinion.

 

[fantome profane]

So long as it is only to stop people from giving out false statistics, false facts, purposefully misleading information, etc. I don't see an issue.
It would only cross the line if it took away the presses ability to hold an opinion.

Would this also apply to the twittering twit when he re-tweets garbage from racist sources?

 

[Deathbydefault]

Would this also apply to the twittering twit when he re-tweets garbage from racist sources?

Nope, just recognized T.V. media.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

This is a conclusion one might draw from the article's author.
But if one listens to the supplied video, one hear's "negative & false".
I infer that being false is a necessary condition.
Looking at the website....it's pro-Democrat & anti-Republican.
(They even advertise "Real Liberal Politics".)
We can expect things to be spun toward this end.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't libel laws in the States already designed to protect from "negative & false" allegations? Whence comes the need to "open them up" if he doesn't plan to use them more widely than on this basis?

 

[Revoltingest]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't libel laws in the States already designed to protect from "negative & false" allegations? Whence comes the need to "open them up" if he doesn't plan to use them more widely?

Libel (including slander) laws have some complexities.....
- If you can't establish monetary damages, the best you can do is get an order to stop committing libel.
- Intent behind falsehoods matters.
- It's extremely expensive sue over libel (& anything else). The damages one can win seldom match the cost.
How would Trump address these?
I don't know his plan, but I suspect that he won't be able to change the law in any significant way.
If anyone fears he might cause trouble with expensive & debilitating suits, there's a great solution....
Adopt a "loser pay" system.
Plaintiffs would risk great loss in filing frivolous suits.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Gods, I'm watching the video now. And... if this man concentrated hard enough he could shatter every irony meter on the planet with the power of his mind. Not break, not damage, not 'put out of commission'; shatter.

 

[Sunstone]

So long as it is only to stop people from giving out false statistics, false facts, purposefully misleading information, etc. I don't see an issue.
It would only cross the line if it took away the presses ability to hold an opinion.

Does it seem to cross the line to you that Trump wants to open up libel laws so that people have a right to sue the press for publishing "negative" opinions or articles about them?

Of course, Trump also wants to make it easy to sue the press for publishing "false" opinions or articles, but what would that mean in practice? The press can already be sued if it publishes an article about someone that is not "substantially true", or that the "gist" of which is not "substantially true".

So what is Trump looking for here that he does not already have? What more does he want? The right to sue over any and all factual errors? The right to sue even if a published article about him is "substantially true"?

If that principle were applied to, say, a forum like RF, there would not be even one active poster on this forum who couldn't be sued a hundred times over, for how often do people -- often innocently -- state as fact something that is not a fact?

 

[Sunstone]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't libel laws in the States already designed to protect from "negative & false" allegations?

Currently, you cannot sue if what is said about you is true, no matter how negative it is. That seems reasonable to me.

Currently, you can sue if what is said about you is substantially false. If it is not 100% true, but is still "substantially true", then you cannot sue. That, too, seems reasonable to me.

 

[Deathbydefault]

Does it seem to cross the line to you that Trump wants to open up libel laws so that people have a right to sue the press for publishing "negative" opinions or articles about them?

Of course, Trump also wants to make it easy to sue the press for publishing "false" opinions or articles, but what would that mean in practice? The press can already be sued if it publishes an article about someone that is not "substantially true", or that the "gist" of which is not "substantially true".

So what is Trump looking for here that he does not already have? What more does he want? The right to sue over any and all factual errors? The right to sue even if a published article about him is "substantially true"?

If that principle were applied to, say, a forum like RF, there would not be even one active poster on this forum who couldn't be sued a hundred times over, for how often do people -- often innocently -- state as fact something that is not a fact?

Let me make it clear that I don't agree with trump or his ulterior motives.
I simply think that news stations should present facts and polls and such that are not misleading.
They can hold whatever opinion they like on whatever subject, that is their right.
However, in the spirit of honesty and journalism, they should not be allowed to lie to your face about important subjects.

Should they be sued? No.
Perhaps they should be kicked off the air or the people at fault should be fired/suspended.
This should only be applied to stations that present themselves as the 'news', lest they lose that title.

 

[Augustus]

Seems like Trump isn't much for Freedom of the Press -- and by extension, Free Speech. Does anyone believe he can "open up the libel laws" to allow lawsuits "like you never get sued before" without that shutting down the core freedoms of the press and speech in this country? If so, what is your reasoning?

If you get a libel system like they have in Britain then it really limits what you can report.

Basically, rich people who can afford the court action can silence people who can't afford it. If you lose a case you can get lumped with the legal fees of the victor on top of any damages that may be awarded. So a $10,000 fine could cost you millions on top of that. Most individuals and media outlets can't afford to take the risk in many cases, even if you know you are right there is no guarantee that the this will be reflected in the court's decision. Less wealthy people also can't take advantage of the laws as they could be saddled with the fees of the victor if they lost.

America is very rare in having genuine free speech laws rather than partial free speech laws. A change in the laws would possibly give you a 2 tier system. The laws protect the powerful not the weak.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you get a libel system like they have in Britain then it really limits what you can report.

Basically, rich people who can afford the court action can silence people who can't afford it. If you lose a case you can get lumped with the legal fees of the victor on top of any damages that may be awarded. So a $10,000 fine could cost you millions on top of that. Most individuals and media outlets can't afford to take the risk in many cases, even if you know you are right there is no guarantee that the this will be reflected in the court's decision. Less wealthy people also can't take advantage of the laws as they could be saddled with the fees of the victor if they lost.

America is very rare in having genuine free speech laws rather than partial free speech laws. A change in the laws would possibly give you a 2 tier system. The laws protect the powerful not the weak.

We also don't have complete freedom of speech.
Regulated or otherwise limited.....
- Commercial speech
- Everyone with a professional license
- We can sue for slander & libel
- SLAAP suits are legal, & the defendant typically isn't awarded damages upon winning
We have a lot of room for improvement.