HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Indeed, and the article says this:

'In determining whether the audience is likely to interpret a statement as one of fact or one of opinion or hyperbole, courts consider a viewpoint of an audience familiar with the speaker, the forum, and the circumstances. Scofield asserts that Guillard is known for “solving” mysteries based on tarot and “readings.” Doesn’t that mean that an audience familiar with her is more likely to interpret anything she says as premised on occult readings, and not on some undisclosed actual evidence?'

With regard to the last sentence, I would argue that the target audience is likely to see no difference here, and what's more, regard the statements as being based on disclosed actual evidence.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: