Your fact-checks will appear here
The legal standards for defamation, including negligence and actual malice.
Federal courts have moved this high-profile fight through multiple stages: a district judge initially allowed ’s $300 million suit against to proceed in 2021, finding his complaint plausible and rejec...
The law treats public figures differently in defamation disputes: they generally must prove "actual malice"—that a defendant published a false statement knowing it was false or with reckless disregard...
Unproven allegations about can be published so long as publishers navigate and : the key legal test for public officials and public figures is whether the publisher acted with “actual malice” — knowle...
has been the subject of multiple legal and public controversies, including criminal charges and at least one civil payment tied to an alleged physical incident, but the public record provided here doe...
Social media platforms and publishers should treat about public figures as high-risk content that requires a mix of clear policy prohibition of illegal or exploitative material, expedited human review...
When public figures amplify unproven allegations during active criminal proceedings they create legal exposure—primarily defamation suits and, in narrow circumstances, federal penalties for false info...
When unredacted survivor audio alleges crimes by powerful figures, newsrooms lean on long-established verification and legal standards — corroboration, fairness, and minimizing harm — rather than publ...