(1) means that statements from anonymous sources would be presumed to be false in a defamation lawsuit (thus, making it easier to prove defamation).
(2) means that the bar for proving defamation in a lawsuit is lowered, if the defendant won’t reveal their source.
In effect, they have to identify their sources to save themselves, i.e. no more whistleblowers.
For fascists, it’s not difficult at all.
How long does this law hold up after the lawsuits start piling up against Fox?
How is this different from how it’s always been? Journalists don’t have to reveal sources, and false allegations have repercussions. How does this stop whistleblowers?
According to this law, now they do have to reveal their source.
Whistleblowers are less apt to come forward if they know their identities will be revealed.
…can you point out any other laws on the books in America where a statement by an anonymous source is presumptively false for purposes of a defamation action?
I can’t, I am not a lawyer. I also can’t point out any other laws on the books in America where an anonymous source is “presumptively true” for purposes of a defamation action.
Then why did you assert that this was how it normally works?
…and yet:
If this is the same as “it’s always been” then it should be trivially easy to demonstrate that this is the way it’s always been.
But you can’t. Because it hasn’t.
Nobody here is asserting that “an anonymous source is “presumptively true” for purposes of a defamation action.”
What the law says is essentially, “if the source is anonymous, its a lie. End of story.” The journalist either reveals the source, or they lose the defamation case.
You work in the County Clerks office and notice that there is a distinct smell of weed in the rest room, every time the county clerk has been there. After doing some Nancy Drewing you can with certainty say that the county clerk indeed smokes weed. Which is strange, since they have been very vocal against drugs and harsher sentences.
Now, if this law passes and you’re in Florida, would you tip of a reporter at Miami Herald, knowing that a court of law can force the reporter to disclose who blew the whistle?
Because that’s how I thought it normally works. I guess I was wrong.
Not if I thought I’d get caught. Whistle blowers already know they’d be in trouble if they get caught, and they think the revelation is worth it to better society. Will journalists lose Freedom of the press with this legislation? Freedom of the press - Wikipedia
So it’s only fascism if it exactly parallels Hitler’s Germany? Let’s try this (my substitutes in bold):
The Republican Party, led by RonDeSantis, blamed the US’s slow-growing economy on the harshness of Democratic policies, on LGBTQ people, and on the Lost Cause legend. In the US, as in Nazi Germany, citizens recalled the pre-Obama years under Republican rule as prosperous but the post-Obama years under weak democratic rule as chaotic and economically disastrous.
Now can we call him a fascist?
…you’ve linked to a rather general broad description of “freedom of the press.” The question, as posed, really can’t be answered outside of broad strokes.
At number 42 on the Press Freedom Index, the US already has a lot of work to do. This kind of law would only drive the US further down the rankings.
Well, with this law you will be caught.
Without it, a journalist would keep your identity a secret, and rely on their reputation for integrity for people to believe that they aren’t just making it up. They couldn’t be sued unless the plaintiff could prove that their allegations were false.
With this law, if they are sued, they have to put you on the stand to testify that you saw your boss smoking weed. They have to prove that their allegations are true.
Ok. It’s a good thing that it’s not much worse than it is. But it’s just like Nazi Germany, so we should be careful. DeSantis is going to be murdering millions of people before you know it. I still think ‘just like the Nazis’ should be reserved for more extreme situations.
Very few people thought the Nazis would murder millions of people before they, you know, did it. At least people in the 1930s couldn’t imagine such a thing was possible. We don’t have that excuse.
As far as I can recall, no one in this thread has said DeSantis is “just like the Nazis.” (Except me, sort of, but I was making a satiric reply to your post.) My point is that a) he can still be a fascist without precisely paralleling the rise of Hitler, and b) the parallels are there nonetheless.
Nobody thinks we are in 1943 Germany territory.
But some of us think we’re in 1931 Germany territory, and we want to stop the next twelve years from moving toward 1943.
And if we wait until we’ve become 1933 Germany, it’s going to be too late.
Fair enough. I don’t like DeSantis because he’s trying to restrict state-university curriculum (gender studies, critical race theory, etc). In my opinion, that’s a deal breaker for someone I’d vote for. But that’s not ‘just like Hitler’ either.
Modern fascists have a lot more in their toolboxes than the guys thwarting democracy a hundred years ago. The smarter realize that it’s not possible to act as overtly as they really would like, so by removing rights and elements that provide checks and balances little by little they are in effect changing not only the rules, but the entire game.
When journalism works in the best way possible, it can expose corruption, crime, hypocrisy, lies, nepotism, abuse of power, discrimination and a whole lot more. The elections in Hungary and Turkey are free in the sense that there are multiple parties, you are free to vote for any candidate. But the government controls basically all broadcast media. Newspapers critical of the ruling party get shut down for “promoting homosexuality and pedophilia.”
This is what it’s like in those countries and they didn’t achieve that over night. They did it just the way they are trying in Florida now - by circumventing the media a little, by making claims that may seem reasonable on the surface. Small changes. And then one day you find that the only news sources legally available are Fox and NY Post.
This is how it’s done in the 21st century.
The U.S. is a lot bigger, and will probably take longer than it did in Hungary. But without the SC as gate keeper…? Maybe Ronny won’t be able to change it all, but he’ll do as much as he can to haul your country in that direction.