Aidan wrote:That's certainly true, but libel laws in the UK and Europe are much different to the US. Your papers are protected by the First Amendment. If I was a newspaper editor, I wouldn't take on a company with the resources of Diago unless I was sure about what I was printing.
Aidan, there's nothing in that article that does not appear to be 100% factual. It's a question of emphasis, and the impression left to the casual reader by such emphasis. "Diageo country's biggest polluter" grabs more eyeballs than "Pollution report stirs muddy waters".
The Boston paper yesterday started a series on charitable activity amongst the local sports franchises, a worthy and interesting story. But with a huge amount of generosity and good news to report, they chose to lead with a headline about, and photos of, certain highly-paid local athletes who don't
give much to charities. It struck me as unnecessarily nasty, and, more important, not particularly relevant to the story as a whole. But it gets readers' attention, and that sometimes seems to be more important than focussing on the real story.