The finding that Rolling Stone magazine defamed a University of Virginia administrator is the latest in a series of legal decisions that experts say signal a hardening attitude to the media and other institutions. Within weeks, Rolling Stone had to apologize for not thoroughly fact-checking it. “It has to be egregious,” said Samantha Barbas, a law professor specializing in media at the University at Buffalo. Barbas said the statements in the original article went from being inaccurate to libelous when Rolling Stone republished the article with corrections. “Rolling Stone knew that Jackie was not a credible source yet despite that they published the story and let it stay on their website.

Source: The Guardian November 05, 2016 12:01 UTC