logo
g Text Version
Auto
Beauty & Self
Books & Music
Career
Computers
Education
Family
Food & Wine
Health & Fitness
Hobbies & Crafts
Home & Garden
Money
News & Politics
Relationships
Religion & Spirituality
Society & Culture
Sports
Travel & Leisure
TV & Movies

dailyclick
Bored? Games!
Postcards
Astrology
Take a Quiz
Rate My Photo

new
English Garden
Costuming
Charity
Women's Fashion
Pop Music


dailyclick
All times in EST

Full Schedule
g
g Civil Rights Site
Sylvia Cochran
BellaOnline's Civil Rights Editor

g

Federalist Papers, Slander, Libel & Mailers

The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 separate statements that sought to persuade the powers that be to ratify the Constitution. They are a surprising collection of opinion pieces written by the major players of the time, although they did not always use their real names. In some cases it was fairly obvious who hid behind a nom de plume, while at others times it was surprising to learn who was doing the writing.

Slander is the making of verbal statements that are fundamentally harmful to another person’s reputation. These may be lies, innuendo, rumors, but also truths to which the person making the slanderous comment became privy in a less than honest fashion. For example, if your priest were to talk at the church social about the things you mentioned in the privacy and sanctity of the confessional, he would be slandering you.

Libel is the other side of the same coin, but in this case the statements are given in a preserved medium that may be accessed time and again. It may be a blog, an article such as this one, a photo or a movie. To go back to our example, if your priest mentions your sins in the church announcement sheet and passes them out on Sunday, his action would be libelous.

Election mailers are mentioned by the Atlanta Journal Constitution when the author mentions anonymous mailings that have the express purpose of doing nothing but present a libelous account of the politician on the other side of the aisle. The originator of this little bit of legislation had the audacity to cite the Federalist Papers as the First Amendment right to free speech in justification of this process.

A close examination of the Federalist Papers shows that the main players in favor of the ratification were using spurious pseudonyms and aliases, but the debate was public and by no means considered hush hush. What was done by Georgia State Senator John Wiles, on the other hand, is little more than opening the door to anonymous groups banding together briefly for a purpose of sending out some information – right, wrong or indifferent – only to disband shortly thereafter when the questions start.

Voters in the meantime are inundated with mailers that are hard to discern from the real ones sent out by actual candidates, and if those did not contain enough half truths and innuendo, they now have to wade through those that contain blatant lies.

Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
RSS
Related Articles
Previous Features
Site Map


Content copyright © 2008 by Sylvia Cochran. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Sylvia Cochran. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Sylvia Cochran for details.

Digg! g delicious Save to Del.icio.us

g


For FREE email updates, subscribe to the Civil Rights Newsletter


Past Issues


print
Printer Friendly
bookmark
Bookmark
tell friend
Tell a Friend
forum
Forum
email
Email Editor

g features
Book Review: CONSTITUTION Translated for Kids

Sanctuary City Policies in the News

Implications of the 'Hannah Montana Bill'

Archives | Site Map

forum
Forum
email
Contact

Past Issues
memberscenter


vote
Driving Amount
Much more
Slightly more
Slightly less
Much less

g


| About BellaOnline | Privacy Policy | Advertising | Become an Editor |
Website copyright © 2008 Minerva WebWorks LLC. All rights reserved.


BellaOnline Editor