Is Libel Still a Crime?

I was going to write this as a kind of Swiftian "modest proposal" but it occurred to me, the longer I thought about it, that I am actually more serious about this than I thought.

Libel is still illegal, right? Is there also a law against intentional dissemination of false information? What about irresponsible dissemination of bad information? There should be, if you ask me.

What I think is this: there should be a fine for anyone who either intentionally or irresponsibly posts information that is not true or that falsely attributes statements to particular people. The ripples one bad post can cause can be very damaging if related to serious issues. They can also invalidate decision making in terms of things like voting.

Sometimes, it is just a matter of a desire for faithfulness to history. Did Einstein really say what everyone wants to believe he did? It's too easy to put a quotation on a picture of the man and pass it off as truth.

But how often do we see memes of politicians with quotations under them (usually under an extremely unflattering picture) that they never said. The people that post these have no criteria other than the fact that they want to believe it because they already feel a certain way about the person in question.

Then ends do not justify the means when it comes to false attributions. I know it serves the purpose of a conservative to make us believe that a liberal said that he would vote for Karl Marx if he were alive; I know might bolster the liberal cause to make us believe that a conservative said that we should dig Burmese tiger traps to catch immigrant children and stop them from coming across the border, but, doing this is wrong. Period. It doesn't lead to discourse, it leads to brawling. It can even be seen as defamation in some cases, which is a crime.

Guilty Until Proven Innocent or Portrait Painting in a Photoshop World

I had other ideas for a post today, but then I saw a post by a Facebook friend about some moronic candidate for office who openly claims that children are born autistic and that storms occur and kill innocent people because God is mad at us for our immoralities. Same old crap, different moron: a "Christian" who likes to think of God in pre-flood terms because it is dramatic and because she thinks doing so will absolve her of her own cruelly-twisted mind: "Oh, but it's God, not me." (People like her never do seem to bother with the little conundrum of how unbelievably [damnably?] arrogant it is to presume to speak for the deity in whom one believes...but that's another story.)

But what struck me is that when I followed the link, I saw a reference to her fellow Republican opponent for candidacy, that said this:

Her opponent in the Republican primary is no prize, either. David Earl Williams III, a politically moderate Navy veteran, has a history of alleged domestic violence. An ex-girlfriend  filed a domestic violence protection order against him, saying he stalked her online and tried to get her fired by impersonating her online. Williams is currently fighting the ruling. 

So...is it a ruling or is it an allegation? Didn't it used to be that to be a writer, one would, at least, try to be precise with one's words? There is a big difference between an allegation and a ruling.