[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: more ideas on anonymity



In message <[email protected]> you write:
>    Date: Sat, 27 Feb 93 23:59:30 GMT
>    From: Tony Kidson <[email protected]>
>
> I see.  So you don't believe in libel or slander laws.

It's people believing and acting on the words that actually 
causes the damage.  I believe that you must judge the reputation 
of the subject and issuer of any statement before you make up 
your mind to act on a statement.  It is only possible to widely 
disseminate a libel if you have control of the means of 
dissemination.  That, is not free speech. Where is the 
opportunity for contrary assertion by the person libelled?

> And NBC was perfectly justified in faking an explosion in a GM truck to
> show it was unsafe, and broadcast it on prime-time TV.  And it didn't do
> anybody any harm at all.  Uh huh.

Faking the explosion, was neither here or there.  Did they deny 
GM the right of denial. Could they be sued by the people that 
they misled?  I do believe in their right to say anything they 
like. They have a reputation to protect.  How much reputation has 
an anonymous source?  Are you going to believe an anonymous tip 
off until you have investigated it?  If so bigger fool you.

Tony

+-----------------+-------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Tony Kidson     |    PGP 2.1 Key by request     | Voice +44 81 466 5127    |
| Morgan Towers,  |                               | E-Mail                   |
| Morgan Road,    |         This Space            | [email protected]  |
| Bromley,        |          to Rent              | [email protected]  |
| England BR1 3QE |Honda ST1100  ==*==  DoD# 0801 | [email protected]|
+-----------------+-------------------------------+----------------------------+