"Clearly in retrospect ,the town felt this particular case wasn't strong enough or worth playing out in a lengthy court battle"
That's not clear at all. They changed their minds after people found out what they were up to behind closed doors. And because they were told to do so in no uncertain terms by their constituents.
If residents had not risen up in outrage ,they would have proceeded with their unconscionable decision.
"And while public officials are expected to shoulder a fair amount of criticism. there should also be recourse to take legal action...with financial backing of the corporation...when citizens make libelous, slanderous or hateful comments"
That's an interesting comment after the previous statement
"it is not the place of the newspaper to try a legal case ,but to, instead ,inform its readers and web site users what any such legal action could mean to them and why."
"Politicians should be entitled to the same laws as citizens. when and if warranted."
Politicians are entitled to exactly the same laws and also to pay the freight out of their own pockets.
"Whether or not Mr. Maclean's letters published in area newspapers were fair comment or libelous seemed to be of little concern to most of you. And we're not ruling on that"
Excuse me. You already ruled on that when you printed the letters.
And let's not suggest the role of publication is the courts to decide after you did exactly that.
The role of civilized arbitrator doesn't fit too well either while the bias is clearly evident.
No comments:
Post a Comment