Comments on: GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com

By: anaceofkidneys

anaceofkidneys — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 22:06:23 +0000

Even if I liked Glenn Beck I wouldn’t see this as libel, since no one is saying he DID rape and murder a young girl; they’re just asking him to prove he didn’t. They’re on his side in this issue; they believe him. They just want *proof*. That’s all.

By: Scott

Scott — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 06:27:27 +0000

To make it very clear to Mark M - this stairic rumor isn’t being thread just because people dislike Glenn Beck, but because it is using exactly the same tactics as the birthers are doing: ignore all evidence to the contrary and insist that the target of the rumor drop everything and respond. It is kind of a teaching tool about why the burden of proof must be on the accuser. This is something that gets ignored by the cretins at Fox News, and now it is biting them. The outlandishness of the accusation (and I haven’t seen anyone try to make up a name or a story to go with it) makes it effective satire.

By: Frank the curmudgeon

Frank the curmudgeon — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:46:57 +0000

Should read : This Beack URL…

By: Frank the curmudgeon

Frank the curmudgeon — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:44:37 +0000

This Beck seems akin to THE REALIST pushing the storey about LBJ copulating with the bullet hole in JFK. I was not too fond of either but I was disgusted by it. How did Larry Flynt make out with his being sued by someone (Fairwell?) for superimposing his picture on a buttox/rectum?
I sometimes wonder whether we should have outlawed challenging someone to a duel.

By: Less reality, more fantasy, no baby blues

Less reality, more fantasy, no baby blues — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:09:21 +0000

Jokes are supposed to be offensive. Lighthearted, inoffensive humor tends to be dull and repetitive. I would much rather laugh at a Holocaust joke or the Truly Tasteless Jokes series than The Family Circus, Friends or a C.B.S. shitcom. Most great comedians defy social boundaries, and are not afraid to offend their audiences: George Carlin, Bill Hicks, Andy Kaufman, Monty Python, and many others.

By: FlyingFish

FlyingFish — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:02:23 +0000

There’s a federal trademark case in the fourth circuit (PETA v. Doughney) that declares, in essence, you have to consider any content in the URL independently from any content on the page itself. What this means is that the domain name itself could be libel — even if it’s obviously parody once you click, the fact that it isn’t obvious before you click creates sufficient confusion for a suit. (What if the person doesn’t click? Then the only information they have is that domain name.) Libel is state law, not federal, so the case isn’t binding, but it could easily be applied. (Of course, then Beck still has to convince a jury.)

Trademark suit isn’t likely to go anywhere, though. The domain name is pretty obviously what’s called “nominative use” — used simply to identify the trademarked item in a sentence, with no attempt to claim endorsement by the trademark owner — which is allowed. (I can write “Coca-Cola” all I want in a news article about it, even though “Coca-Cola” is trademarked, because there’s no other way to refer to it and I need to refer to it to write the article. Same principle.)

By: Powers

Powers — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:00:22 +0000

David — I suppose so. But where “elitist” means “believing oneself to be elite and therefore better than the non-elite”, I’m looking for a word that means “believing oneself to be humble and not concerned with trivial matters, and therefore better than the intelligentsia”.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:53:03 +0000

I admit I have very little knowledge about this topic. I had never heard of Glen Beck before this, and I haven’t looked at the website. However, even if the site is clearly satire and protected by the first amendment (which it probably is), I don’t think having a site with a URL like that is right. I know that when I Google things, I place a lot of weight for my choices on the URL of the sites listed. If I was just finding out about a person, and a site like that was one of the top 5 sites that came up, I’d be mighty disturbed. However, like Rasheed and chuckers said, if the URL had “did” at the beginning, to make it a question, it would be more likely to be seen as satire, and less as libel.

By: David A. Rooney

David A. Rooney — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:04:31 +0000

Powers - isn’t the opposite of elitist, egalitarian? Doesn’t fit somehow.

By: Powers

Powers — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:42:47 +0000

Naming logical fallacies is “elitist Latin BS”? That kind of argument is just… What’s the opposite of “elitist”?