Another take on the Herald libel case

I’m going to pronounce myself officially blogged out on the subject. But I do want to call your attention to Adam Reilly’s smart piece on the Herald libel decision, which has been posted on the Phoenix’s Web site and will appear in tomorrow’s paper.

Pay careful attention to the words of First Amendment lawyer Jonathan Albano, who wasn’t involved in the case, but who did help write an amicus brief on the Herald’s behalf. Albano tells Reilly: “You’ve got some very talented lawyers out there who are going to be looking at this decision, and saying, ‘What can I take from it?'”

In other words, you don’t have to produce something as sensationalistic and error-filled as the Herald’s articles on Judge Ernest Murphy to be worried about the implications of the Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion. This could harm freedom of the press for all of us.

One thought on “Another take on the Herald libel case

  1. Mike

    Not much news there, Dan. Sure, they’re interesting comments but they essentially say what media lawyers have been telling their clients for years: Be competent, thorough and sceptical, especially of information that comes from folks with obvious axes to grind.Oddly enough, it’s also what journalism profs have been saying for years.

Comments are closed.