this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
112 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19144 readers
4959 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If behind a paywall you can read it here: https://archive.li/az14v

all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why it's a newspaper's problem if he's a hateful moron. Imagine calling a child a faggot, even personally. It's so wrong and sad. For a child, for a reporter, and for he is the one to play victim and charge them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can't SLAAP be applied here? This sound like something that should qualify, to me, but not a lawyer and probably pretty ignorant.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

SLAPP isn't a law, it's a way to describe abuse of the system that's mostly legal as long as it doesn't reach the point of frivolity.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks, that's a useful distinction. But I'm still curious why it wouldn't apply here? The paper can clearly show that it reported in good-faith, so why isn't it possible to countersue the politician who clearly is trying to harm them via the courts? I would think this would allow them to pursue financial relief for their legal troubles. I must be missing something fundamental about what SLAAP can and cannot provide.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s not how the law works. You need to tell us why an anti-SLAAP action (which Wisconsin does not have as a cause of action) would apply here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Ok, so Wisconsin not having these rules is a factor. Thanks!