Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Amanda B asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

If Fox news is telling lies about the President why doesn't he stop them using defamation law?

In law, defamation–also called calumny, libel , slander (for spoken words), and vilification(for written or otherwise published words) –is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. It is usually, but not always, a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).

In common law jurisdictions, slander refers to a malicious, false and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. Related to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person.

If someone was on TV telling lies about me I would sue. Could it be that Obama doesn't want it in a court of law because he'll be forced to take the stand and it will come out that these things are true?

Update:

Ponch you are showing off that government education! We do have the right to free speech as long as it doesn't impede on someone elses rights. In other words, you are free to say what ever you want about whoever you want as long as it's true. The Constitution doesn't protect the right to lie about people, hence slander laws. If you were right there would be no slander law.

7 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    If a sitting President of the United States even filed a suit for violation for defamation, it would be a precedent that would clog up the courts for decades, and would be very difficult to prosecute anyway. It would also make him/her petty and insecure, rather like President Nixon and his enemies list. Viewers or listeners should be aware that there is a disclaimer that the stations issue that their management does not necessarily agree with a position and should not be held liable for its presentation. According to the FCC, that's a huge loophole to go along with the freedoms of expressions that we have in this country. If a statement is made, such as when Rep. Wilson referred to Obama as a liar on the house floor, that is just a matter of poor taste and judgment on his part. It is not a violation of law. He was reprimanded by the House and made to apologize to the President and to his peers in the House. There are ways to communicate an opposing view using decorum without ripping someone's integrity to shreds.

  • 1 decade ago

    If this was possible, don't you think the Bush family would already own GE (parent of NBC and MSNBC), CNN and CBS? I agree with another poster who said that the President is above (or should be) quibbling with stupid crap like he isn't a citizen or doesn't have a birth certificate. But for a channel to point out deficiencies in the vetting process or hiring of morons (Van Jones, for instance) is part of the job and is to be respected. The fact that the Obama administration is now boycotting Fox News shows they don't have enough conviction in their positions to debate people who aren't already on their side. Can you imagine if George Bush didn't grant interviews to the news organizations that had taken clear stands against him? He didn't do that, because he had more class than the current administation. To try and marginalize a news organization is a little too dictatorial for my taste.

  • 1 decade ago

    The problem is that Fox News show what, where, and when they got what they say and show the proof rather than take the words that are being said from the White House.

    They do a fact check on everything and when they get something wrong with in 24 hours they retract what they said and say the correct thing.

    Something I wish all the stations out there were doing.

  • ?
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    Because here in the good old U S of A we have freedom of speech. So as long as FNC does not start calling Obama a rapist or a pedophile he will respect their right to free speech and not look to bring a lawsuit against them. The media is so vast now that it would be impossible to monitor all of the things said about the president,good and bad alike. But if a news network as big as Fox starts baselessy labeling the president as a murderer or a sexual deviant you can bet your bottom dollar that legal action will take place. If Obama was going to sue everyone in the media that has falsely bashed him he would have already started litigation against Limbaugh,Beck,Hannity and Coulter. But Obama respects the constitution and the freedom it ensures.

    Actually i never went to public school. Roman Catholic education from 1st grade to Grad school. I think you missed my point. Obama is not sweating the small,unprovable lies that FNC and other conservative media outlets spew about him. He knows that he has a birth certificate. He knows he is not a socialist hell bent on destroying America. He knew he wasnt going to be sworn in on the Quran. But wouldnt he look like an ****** if he brought legal action against them for these statements/lies? He picks his battles. Now if they were going to produce outlandish lies about him and air them that is a different matter. Get it? I mean if they came out and said "Obama personally paid for the abortions of over 1,000 unborn babies" im sure he would take legal action against such a blatant lie. But he knows the GOP will be the GOP and hurl unfounded accusations that fall somewhere within the realm of reason at him. He realizes this and he lets them do it. Why didnt George W Bush sue those who called him a war criminal or a member of the Illuminati? Same reason. Its politics as usual. They try to make something out of nothing. That is how the game is played,and as long it is played within reason everybody is fair game. So dont you dare try to degrade me. Dont insult my intelligence. It is you who is making a big stink over the same old political he said/she said nonsense. Maybe now you understand.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ross
    Lv 4
    5 years ago

    I agree. they have been given of undertaking time and time lower back to handle particular issues. case in point, earlier giving information out approximately Van Jones, Beck contacted the White abode and waited for his or her reaction. no longer something. humorous how Jones had to resign. certainty is what's being informed.

  • 1 decade ago

    Because the president dont have the rights to control,

    there is a supreme power who controls all those things

    that is

    THE Director of FBI....

  • 1 decade ago

    Because the President is not that petty.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.