Discussion 11

2.  When it comes to defamation of character, the press is given greater latitude when it comes to public figures than with private citizens. Is this appropriate? Why or why not?

I think that it is important that the press can freely analyze the actions and morals of public figures, especially political figures. That said, if they had less latitude, they would be subject to a great amount of litigation just from stating facts. The individual being written about could easily sue on the grounds of defamation, even if that was not the motive of the press. They would do this to avoid negative press. This actually does happen even now with the great freedom the press has. It even happens when private citizens try to spread the word on negative aspects of corporations and politicians. But, it does not happen to near the extent that it could. I believe this is appropriate because of the need to protect the privacy of citizens and to have the freedom of press to hold prominent people and organizations accountable.