Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: thoughtomator
Even a newspaper is bound by false-advertising laws. If they advertise that they print "all the news fit to print", and in practice are clearly doing otherwise, they're liable.

Liable for what? What defines whether they are "doing otherwise"?

You have a better suggestion?

Do I have a better suggestion for what? The law?

Shall we simply whine endlessly about their malfeasance, or shall we do something substantial about it?

1)Stop buying and advertising in any paper you don't like.

2)Try to get as many people to do the same.

3)Start an alternative paper/network and counter the BS.

Suing them for frivilous stuff is NOT substantial and definitely not productive. You won't find a good attorney to take a case he knows he might sanctioned in.

37 posted on 06/20/2004 9:38:52 AM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: 1L

Here are a couple of possibilities others have suggested:

As far as false advertising goes, if they promise potential customers that they don't have a political agenda, and a rat on the inside can be found to testify that they do, then that's false advertising under law.

You may be content to let them freely engage in sedition without opposition, but I for one will seek any method available to stick it to them as long as their behavior remains the same.

38 posted on 06/20/2004 9:59:09 AM PDT by thoughtomator (The New York Times: All the Lies that Fit the Socialist Agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson