The Attack of the News is the Greatest Tragedy of America To Date

We are in the age of information. At the click of a mouse or the swipe of a finger, we have more information than we ever thought possible. Want to know how old Mick Jagger is, want to know how to install a faucet, want to know how to solve a quadratic formula, just click, and there is all the information, directions and advice you need. It is incredible to me growing up in the 70's when World Book Encyclopedia was the pinnacle of advanced knowledge available to me, outside of my parents and teachers.

Has the access to information become so easily and readily available that is has become a bad thing. If you have about $200, an email and a desire, you can create a website today. You can put anything you want on it. You can create a social media account and post seemingly whatever you want. It seems you can say or write anything. So in this age of information, what can you believe? Is there still a source of information that can be believed in the age of big information. Are there laws that govern information and how do we as consumers of news, decipher what is real.

The first amendment to the constitution gives us freedom of speech but what does it cover and how does it work. Are there limitations?

The first amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Let me be clear here. You can say or write whatever you want in this great country of ours. You do not have to worry that you will be put to death, for instant, penning a satirical commentary. But certain speech, in certain circumstances, is not protected by the First Amendment and you might have consequences which could be civil or criminal depending on the situation.

Some speech that will give you consequences are following:

False statements of fact:

A writer or publication, can't state or publish a false statement of fact when they know it is false and do so maliciously. In the landmark case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), the United States Supreme Court case established the Actual Malice Standard which has to be met before slanderous reporting can be considered for libel with the caveat that applies to people in the public eye. There is a much high standard for private citizens. What this boils down to, if a person or publication uses a false statement, knowingly, and to cause harm, the victim can sue for libel and receive a monetary judgement.

This libel law has kept print media in check for many years. One famous case was won by Melania Trump who filed a defamation action in the Melania Trump v Daily Mail in New York state commercial court and in the UK High Court settled in 2017 against the Daily Mail over allegations that she previously worked as an escort. Mrs. Trump claimed damages in the sum of $150 million. She was awarded $3 million. And there has been others. Rebel Wilson v the Bauer Media was awarded $4,567,472 in a landmark case in Australia. In America, Carol Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc., in 1976 awarded her $200,000. Newspapers and magazines have to be very careful about what they print, as they can be sued for millions of dollars putting their establishment at risk.

Fighting words, offensive speech, and creating clear and present danger:

There are also a number of laws and landmark cases in the Supreme Court in which free speech could land you with criminal charges.

In the case of Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), which is a United States Supreme Court case where the Court named the fighting words doctrine to make speech that is insightful and threatening to the public punishable by criminal law. Another words, I can't stand in the Food For Less, call you names and threaten you with bodily harm. If I do so, the police can arrest me and charge me criminally with a crime. Make no mistake, I can do this, but there are consequences to my actions.

Imminent lawless action is a standard currently used that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), for defining the limits of our first amendment rights. The case made clear that speech that made a "clear and present danger", and speech that just advocated violence is punishable in criminal law. In a nutshell, I can not stand in the middle of KKK rally and start chanting "Kill the Black Man" while an African American happens to be walking past.

There are also laws that dictate other forms of speech that are not protected by the first amendment and punishable civilly or criminally. Some of them are obscenities, child pornography, copy rights, speech in a private business, speech in school, speech by a minor, speech in the military, and speech in a prison.

So let's get back to the original question of "Who can you believe?". I would give you this advice.

1. Consider the source. There are established new sources in this country. For instance, newspapers and network new stations that have been around for many years. Although there definitely has been a tilting of affiliation for right or left thinking, they are credible sources of news. These established news sources will not jeopardize their business practices to report actual false news, like "Aliens have Just Landed at Daily Plaza".
2. Consider the commentary. Opinion is just a person's take on things, and is protected speech. Whenever you see an opinion piece or an "Op Ed", know that it is just someone's conclusion on facts with their own sense of morality and experience mixed in. It is not fact. Really my good day is someone else's bad day. Be careful not to confuse opinoin with facts.
3. Consider the Author. Always look at who is writing, who is commenting, who owns the publication. Are they running a story just for shock value and who are they. I know I would take a report about global warming from a renowned scientist who has spent 20 years researching it to be more credible than say, a business man who owns a coal factory.
4. Consider the law of more than one source. Unless I see it, read it and hear it in more than 3 credible news sources, I really don't believe it. This sadly is the world we live in but the information is there you just need to take the time to actually research the information.

There is an old adage that states, "Don't believe everything you read." I am a huge proponent of this philosophy. Be choosy about what you believe. Be knowledgeable about the times we live in. Be conscious of what is going on and how it can effect he future.

I am so thankful we live in a world with so much information. I love to wade through newspapers, reading all the information I can about the world we live in. All the information in the world, literally, is at your finger. Go get it.