[disconnected]

The "free press" doesn't have a "get out of jail free" card of being able to claim that they are just a "platform" and be able to dodge all responsibility for what they print like Facebook does.

If the press writes something objectively false about someone, they are starting at a defamation lawsuit. If they write something that gets someone killed, they will be staring at possible criminal liability. If they print, I dunno, a picture of a child having sex, there'll be hellfire and brimstone (both legal and social).

And no, saying "ha ha, it was just an opinion column" doesn't save them.

"Press" has perks but also has responsibilities. The free press is "ok" with these rules because they've had to follow them for decades. What they want is a level playing field.

[justapassenger]

Publishing a story by a reporter, even best one with all the Pulitzer’s isn’t at all comparable to statements of president elected by tens millions of votes, who controls the most powerful military force in the world.

The same press will report on those racist tweets, run stories whole week where they dissect that, opinions, angry letters, etc. Should press stop running stories about racist behavior of the president? How is running story about what president said, different in terms of impact on spreading those views? Would Trump be where he’s right now if press wouldn’t pay attention to his crazy tweets before and fuel his popularity?