Libel?

[tapintoamerica]

I know I have asked this sort of question before, but every case, as they say, is different.

In the passage below, the writer throws out a series of allegations and a series of alleged perps but never links any individual to a specific action. So they're all lumped in with everything in perception. Would anybody have a claim from this? Just curious.

http://blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/College_Football_22/Straight_No_Chaser_dez.shtml

No one told these men about living-in-the-light, confronting the unsympathetic, non-empathetic quasi-hostile angry, envious sports press - vultures who hypocritically refused to document the coke-snorting, womanizing, gambling and drug abuse by guys like Marino, Montana, Kelly and Elway, just as they’ve reluctantly covered the fall of Brett Favre . .

 

[Rhody31]

No.

 

[MonsterLobster]

<b><i>Reluctantly</b></i> covered the fall of Favre? Ha. People have made careers out of this.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Since that column isn't in English, I don't think it's going to do much damage anyway.

 

[fishwrapper]

Nope is correct.
Libel (and we're only talking civil here, because libel is a tort claim) must prove intent and malice. In addition, if written opinion is marked or implied, it becomes exponentially more difficult to prove.

 

[sgreenwell]

You always frequently have to prove actual damages, which is why (I believe) Rodney Dangerfield famously got a libel award of $1.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

always frequently?

 

[mediaguy]

I think frequently always works better.

 

[beardpuller]

How in God's name did you find this "columnist" and his work? Please promise me you'll never link to it again.

 

[93Devil]

Did anyone else get a Panera ad while reading that? I think they are missing their demo.

And Jim Brown as a father figure? He makes Ben Roethlisberger look like Matt Lauer when it comes to the ladies.

Dez is a public figure, so libel, of course, is much harder to establish.

 

[MonsterLobster]

I had some time tonight to go back and read some other stories on that site. It's.... entertaining.

I am an avid NHL fan, read this story three times, have my own criticisms of Versus and still am not quite sure what the point is.

http://blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/Editorial_46/Versus_Still_Does_Not_Get_It.shtml

 

[sgreenwell]

always frequently?

doh! also frequently. Although that is just as awkwardly worded, now that I think about it... But why would I ever want to think about posts on a message board?

 

[Padre]

"the coke-snorting, womanizing, gambling and drug abuse by guys like Marino, Montana, Kelly and Elway"

agree on the awkward readability, but that part links all four to all four 'alleged' actions. Because they're famous, they have zero recourse against the writer?

 

[SpeedTchr]

I had some time tonight to go back and read some other stories on that site. It's.... entertaining.

I am an avid NHL fan, read this story three times, have my own criticisms of Versus and still am not quite sure what the point is.

http://blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/Editorial_46/Versus_Still_Does_Not_Get_It.shtml

More entertaining than the name of the writer?

 

[bpoindexter]

I'd say no as well, though his reference to Marino, Montana, Kelly and Elway was eye-opening. That said, it does appear to be written by one pissed-off individual (malice?). Just my opinion. Zero editing, and one more thing: The-writer-sure-likes-hyphens-doesn't-he-?