(On you to prove you weren’t lying or being negligent. At which point you produce records of phone calls you made to both parties, etc. Can we see that here. Actual evidence of an attempt to write a balanced story?)

The place to take Journalism 101 is NOT in a courtroom after you’ve been sued for libel.

A public figure can sue you. Has to prove malice. It’s more difficult. But not impossible. Especially if you quote McConnell. A truly staggering amount of his drivel bashes Gallaudet, the signing Deaf Community, and whatnot. If a public figure had to pray for the perfect example of someone who writes with reckless disregard for anything but his own twisted opinion, McConnel is just EXCELLENT. McConnell practically guarantees the judge is gonna take a very close look.

A private citizen can sue you too. Only has to prove negligence. It’s a lot easier. The judge will ask (about the private citizen)… “Well did this person willingly participate in a public discussion of this controversey, or have access to the media and use that access to influence the outcome of this issue?” If the answers to those questiosn are “no,” don’t automatically assume that person is a public figure just because he or she works for a federally funded university. The janitor up the hall works there too.

Furthermore, if it ever hits the point where it looks like people were writing with what turns out to be actual malice, not mere negligence, against people who turn out to be true private citizens, not limited purpose public figures or actual public figures, trust me, you are gonna be up late into the night trying to calculate when your grandchildren will finish paying off the amount of money you’re gonna end up owing.

In any case though truth is a defense. Just keep in mind it can get to be very expensive and difficult to prove that, especialy in the case of private citizens. It’s not always on them to prove you’re lying or negligent. It’s on YOU to prove that. So the first thing a judge is gonna do is say “Well did you call up such and so to get his or her side of it?” If the answer is no you’re not looking like rainbows and flowers, if you take my meaning.

In any case, ignore this if you want. In fact, PLEASE ignore it. PLEASE keep taking your BS from Rate My Professor and second and third-hand sources and DON’T call up the individuals you’re smearing directly and DON’T create that phone record. Don’t do any of that. Keep assuming the world is filled up with people who would rather avoid you than fight you. Then when you do end up in court you’re gonna be where you deserve to be.

And don’t tell me that other colleges aren’t dealing with similar issues of bullying and/or oppressions. I feel that this article has blown the issues seriously out of proportion and had made the issues seem very grave.

“Not deaf enough” was the media’s hook on the issue of Jane k. Fernades. It really stemmed down that process in which she was chosen was unethical and did not follow the standard protocol. Of course, labeling that she wasn’t deaf enough sounded more interesting and scandalous.

Those are my two cents.

OMG… What does Kappa Gamma have to do with this? Grow up…

anyways, look at Gallaudet’s administration. Do you not see any common traits: white, male, kappa gamma afflicted. Should I elaborate more, I think not. Time for changes in administration!! Majority of them has have the same position during the protests and whatnots. Hint: provost, assistant vice President, dean of student affairs, and so on