This, despite
publishing something false that an ordinarily responsible reporter would not have reported as true, and thereby harming a public person, perhaps seriously.
If
you publish something false about a person or entity that could damage their reputation, you've committed libel and could be in big trouble.
Not exact matches
I do not understand the interest in
publishing something as
false and farfetched as this story.
Maybe they will stop saying
something so stupid, and by you stopping just one person from passing
something so
false and misleading, you might save a new writer who will learn that indie
publishing is work.
Anyone could sue anybody then, where is freedom of opinion here and what about
something someone
publishes which you take for a true statement, that turns out to be
false?
My bigger concern is if you write
something that is discovered to be
false - My understanding is if you were sued, you would have to prove that you
published your article in good faith, believing everything you said was true.