racism defamation law

[KingScorpio]

why is there now law in the usa, that allows someone who has been accused of racism, to sue the defamer, if he is absolutely not racist?

many big american tv and newspapers like cnn nyt, washington journal constantly defame others of racism. why can't they be sued, easier

regards

[darkangel11]

Every group uses this argument to gain something by defaming and shaming their opponents into submission.
-women will use this argument against men
-gays and lesbians against straight people
-black people against white people

We could go on and on. It's one of those paradoxes where calling a black person black can offend them and white people somehow don't feel offended when they're called white... It's the same with Jews. Saying that someone is a Jew, even if it's true, can be taken as insult. It's a jungle out there.

[franky1]

defamation is not just about an insult.
its about a perceived wrongful insult that causes actual financial damage.

if i just called kingscorpio a rapist. its meaningless. but if a romour got around that caused kingscorpio to lose his job or his landlord evicted him. he may have a case.

however he has to show direct linkage that  caused the landlord/employer to act. otherwise kingscorpio can only sue his landlord/employer for their opinion.  as it was their opinion that caused the finaincial loss.

next if its deemed that its true. and the landlord did have the right to evict due to rapes caused by king scorpio. the landlord can then increase the landlords costs of having to attend court and any financially loss related to anything king scorpio for publiciing that his landlord is a bad landlord and a liar.

but again it has to show proper financial loss linked to the defamation

with media. for instance being racist to megan merkle.. megan can sue the news. but the news cant counter-sue her if they proved they are not racist. because they didnt lose anything.. for media even bad news is good profit. plus they have legal insurance so there wouldnt be costs

[KingScorpio]

why is there now law in the usa, that allows someone who has been accused of racism, to sue the defamer, if he is absolutely not racist?

many big american tv and newspapers like cnn nyt, washington journal constantly defame others of racism. why can't they be sued, easier

regards

Did you stop to think about it for one second before posting this thread?

Being racist isn't a crime, that's why.

When did CNN, NYT or Washington Journal defame others of racism? It may very well have happened, but you should at least provide an example before shitposting into the wind.

it is highly offence, and i am not talking about being racist, i am talking about accusing someone publicly of racism, because thats highly damaging for someone's image.

being racist is highly unpopular.

[franky1]

damaging some ones image is not defamation

damaging some ones reputation to such an extent it drastically affects them is..

by this i dont mean just a small negative review that sways a couple customers away from a restaurant. i dont mean saying someone smells and it stops someone getting a date with a woman on one ocassion.
i dont mean media saying one of their stories out of the millions they right are affecting their overall business

defamation has to be a reputation ruining task using lies, where it truly creates true hardship. like proper long term loss of income hardship

[TheCoinGrabber]

What is this specific law you are talking about? Anyway imho there should be harsher punishment for misrepresentation if it's a media company because they have too much power that even a retraction isn't enough to erase any misinformation they have spread.

damaging some ones image is not defamation

snip

defamation has to be a reputation ruining task using lies, where it truly creates true hardship. like proper long term loss of income hardship

The problem though is with today's cancel culture, even being accused of a non-crime such as racism is enough to destroy a person's life. We are seeing this with the poundmetoo movement. Touching someone's hand is not a crime but you can be portrayed as creep. People have actually lost jobs over it. There was one story about a guy who got fired when a female collegue at an out-of work-party overheard them ranking the women at work by looks. Of course the accusation is misogyny, a non-crime but the guy got fired anyway.

[TwitchySeal]

You have to prove that a false statement about someone is actually false.

It's impossible to prove someone is or is not a racist.  

"Joe is a KKK member, he is in charge of bringing bagels and coffee to the weekly meetings, and burns a cross in his yard every year on July 4th" <=== defamation
"Joe is a racist" <=== nope

[Sadlife]

Racism is for snowflake people who can't accept that the world is not equal and if equality actually exist then why some people and children starves to death while on the other hand scums who doesn't deserve anything has everything they need. In reality humans are the most intelligent being in the world, who can't find joy in life without discrimination or violence.

[KingScorpio]

You have to prove that a false statement about someone is actually false.

It's impossible to prove someone is or is not a racist.  

"Joe is a KKK member, he is in charge of bringing bagels and coffee to the weekly meetings, and burns a cross in his yard every year on July 4th" <=== defamation
"Joe is a racist" <=== nope

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

regards

[AbelBaricStevenson]

What about you call a KKK as not racist, and it get his friends suspicious? This lead to his house burned down? Who will be the sued one on that case? I think don't mention it at all you may get sued.

[franky1]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

[KingScorpio]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

[franky1]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

if there is no harm caused. then it is just a lie.. inwhich a retraction/correction should be made. if there is harm then costs can be reimbursed.

has trump lost his job or felt a change in his income due to accusations..
has media incurred any substantial loss due to lies.

a lie in of itself is not a crime

[inanilujimi]

Sometimes the media does not present the news but instead confuse the atmosphere.
Small problems should be brought up to make it look attractive to air. Ironic indeed but that's a fact that is happening now.

[franky1]

Sometimes the media does not present the news but instead confuse the atmosphere.
Small problems should be brought up to make it look attractive to air. Ironic indeed but that's a fact that is happening now.

thats why its called media now and not news.
news had some integrity and some editorial control of what was presented.
media however is just about entertaining and clickbait

[TwitchySeal]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

You can't prove that anyone isn't a racist though.  And even if you could, you'd also have to prove that the person calling someone a racist didn't actually believe they were racist.

At least that's how the law works in America.

[KingScorpio]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

You can't prove that anyone isn't a racist though.  And even if you could, you'd also have to prove that the person calling someone a racist didn't actually believe they were racist.

At least that's how the law works in America.

so how is it then allowed to defame someone to be racist if it can't be proven? it is clear defamation to use the "r word",
it would be complete against the spirit of martin luther king and nelson mandela that demanded that people are supposed to be judged on their character and not on their skin color.
trump was judged and defamed a racist based on his skin color, by the democrats. that was clearly an abuse of power.

[TwitchySeal]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

You can't prove that anyone isn't a racist though.  And even if you could, you'd also have to prove that the person calling someone a racist didn't actually believe they were racist.

At least that's how the law works in America.

so how is it then allowed to defame someone to be racist if it can't be proven? it is clear defamation to use the "r word",
it would be complete against the spirit of martin luther king and nelson mandela that demanded that people are supposed to be judged on their character and not on their skin color.
trump was judged and defamed a racist based on his skin color, by the democrats. that was clearly an abuse of power.

Are we talking the legal definition of defamation (in America), or your opinion of what the legal definition of defamation should be?

[KingScorpio]

both is defamation, if jow is not a racist he should be able to sue the defamer, because racism accusations have defaming effekt on people.

both are an accusation. the important parts are HOW THE ACCUSATION EFFECTS people
in america they love to put a price on 'mental stress' which makes it easy in america that the harm/loss caused has a financial value.
other countries however think only true financial loss should be valued. eg loss of income, shelter

theaccusation alone is not that unlawful. its the impact that accusation caused.
lying. by itself in public is not a crime. if it was then there would not be a special custom to when in court ned to swear on a bible and commit to a contract of telling the truth or be punished when standing in court.
again if lying by itself was a crime there would be no need for the special perjury condition

using certain words is not a crime in of itself
for instance i as a white man have good friendships with people of other ethnic backgrounds. if i called one of them the N word. well thats just being part of the banter.. yet if i said it to a stranger and said it in a derogatory way that then caused someone negative affect that can be proven as some form of harm/loss. then that can lead to trouble
saying the N word in of itself is not a crime.. who, how, why and what impact it caused. could be a crime

if you accuse someone of being racist in an egalitarian minded society, you can literally destroy his image and career, happened often in germany especially to celebrities and politicians.
if that person is racist, it is not a defamation but if he is not racist, like for example trump, then it is massively defamatory.

You can't prove that anyone isn't a racist though.  And even if you could, you'd also have to prove that the person calling someone a racist didn't actually believe they were racist.

At least that's how the law works in America.

so how is it then allowed to defame someone to be racist if it can't be proven? it is clear defamation to use the "r word",
it would be complete against the spirit of martin luther king and nelson mandela that demanded that people are supposed to be judged on their character and not on their skin color.
trump was judged and defamed a racist based on his skin color, by the democrats. that was clearly an abuse of power.

Are we talking the legal definition of defamation (in America), or your opinion of what the legal definition of defamation should be?

western legal traditions are pretty much the same, defaming someone to be a racist, although it has not been proven weather he is racist, is absolutely wrong, and can be highly destructive discriminatory and defaming for that person.

there is something called, innocent till proven guilty, trump was continuously defamed being a racist, although he was just trying to be a president/administer of a piece of land.

[TwitchySeal]

there is something called, innocent till proven guilty

To successfully sue someone for defamation, you need to prove they are guilty of defamation, meaning you have to prove their statement was false.

You can't prove Trump isn't racist, and even if you could, you'd still have to prove that the person calling him racist didn't believe he was racist.

If you think Trumps a racist, it's not defamation to call him a racist.