Imo, freedom of the Press doesn't mean freedom from responsibility; the laws protecting politicians and journalists from libel and slander are far too forgiving. It was a blatant hate crime hoax, the victims should be able to sue whoever broke the story. With that said, the whole "bury the retraction on page 11 of the style section" thing needs to change too. I hate to advocate against the free press, but they've proven time and time again that they are amoral hacks, who wouldn't know what ethics is if it was wearing a name tag. It's almost like if they're op-ed bullshit, they aren't journalists and aren't protected and should fall under separate rules. Something needs to be done soon, because we're reaching a point of no return. If there is zero credibility given to any journalism, then the government can basically do whatever it wants: not that that would really be remarkably different than the current situation, but at least now we can get drunk and howl at the moon about it.

Imo, freedom of the Press doesn't mean freedom from responsibility; the laws protecting politicians and journalists from liable and slander are far too forgiving. It was a blatant hate crime hoax, the victims should be able to sue whoever broke the story. With that said, the whole "bury the retraction on page 11 of the style section" thing needs to change too. I hate to advocate against the free press, but they've proven time and time again that they are amoral hacks, who wouldn't know what ethics is if it was wearing a name tag. It's almost like if they're op-ed bullshit, they aren't journalists and aren't protected and should fall under separate rules. Something needs to be done soon, because we're reaching a point of no return. If there is zero credibility given to any journalism, then the government can basically do whatever it wants: not that that would really be remarkably different than the current situation, but at least now we can get drunk and howl at the moon about it.

Imo, freedom of the Press doesn't mean freedom from responsibility; the laws protecting politicians and journalists from liable and slander are far too forgiving. It was a blatant hate crime hoax, the victims should be able to sue whoever broke the story. With that said, the whole "bury the retraction on page 11 of the style section" thing needs to change too. I hate to advocate against the free press, but they've proven time and time again that they are amoral hacks, who wouldn't know what ethics is if it was wearing a name tag. It's almost like if they're op-ed bullshit, they aren't journalists and aren't protected and should fall under separate rules. Something needs to be done soon, because we're reaching a point of no return. If there is zero credibility given to any journalism, then the government can basically do whatever it wants: not that would really be remarkably different than the current situation, but at least now we can get drunk and howl at the moon about it.