so just read about what happened to kate middleton. topless photos posted in a french magansine. And now the royal family is sueing this magasine for privacy infringement. My query is, if the reports claim freedom of speech and such as a defense do you think its correct. Not lawfully correct but morally correct. This is right after the events happening in the mid east due to a movie (not condoning the actions of burning embassies or anything) but it almost seems that everytime a reporter or press does something like this they run behind the covers yelling "freedom of speech! freedom of speech!". Does society care anymore that its a freedom and right but it doesnt mean unabashed slander or that words can actually hurt or insult someone, cause damage (not damage as stick and stones and what not, but damage as in causing sparks such as in the mid east).
I mean as a fairly black and white scenario. Lets say guy A bad mouths guy B on the street. Turns out guy B is alot stronger and a kickboxing champion. Guy b beats the living snot out of guy A. guy A claims assault, guy B claims provocation. What would have stopped guy A from slandering guy B, given that guy B had done nothing to provoke him in the first place. And if the answer is "everything, cuz guy A acted on his on account" then how come society can just the "freedom of speech" umbrella be a constant get out of jail free card?
thoughts?