Florida defamation bill faces conservative backlash
Conservative radio host Trey Radel bickered with a Republican Florida House member on his program Monday evening, railing against legislation that would change the state’s defamation laws.
If passed, the changes will lead to increased liability against journalists and others accused of making false statements about another that harm that person’s reputation.
“I absolutely sympathize and agree with you, but I do have issues (with) the bill,” Radel said during his show on a Southwest Florida Fox News station.
Rep. Alex Andrade, a Pensacola Republican and the House Bill sponsor, shot back: “But you got to be honest with listeners and say you that you want to protect the ‘get out of jail free card’ to defame people.”
“No, that’s bullcrap,” Radel replied. “Now I take issue with what you’re saying.”
It’s not just Radel speaking out against the legislation — though he is one of the loudest. While the measure has moved steadily through the Legislature, the past week has seen a mounting conservative resistance against it, much like the resistance that in part derailed a similar proposal last year.
Radel, a former Republican member of Congress, pointed to a part of the bill (HB 757) creating a presumption that anyone publishing a false statement that relied on an anonymous source, acted with “actual malice,” a key legal hurdle for public figures to win defamation lawsuits.
The term means someone knew something said about another was false or acted with a reckless disregard for the truth.
“Look at the anonymous sources that have been utilized over and over, what you end up doing by subjecting them to this, you send a chilling effect out there for the next person who wants to expose the (Department of Justice, FBI and IRS),” Radel said.
The legislation also would allow someone to sue if content made or modified by artificial intelligence leads a “reasonable viewer” to believe something false about a person that’s “highly offensive.” As Radel asked, “Define reasonable.”
It requires a hearing within 60 days of a request for one on whether an accused defamatory comment is fact or opinion, and whether a fact can be proved. Along with the other components of litigation, Radel said the hearings would be expensive for those sued, and he predicted liberals would “take advantage” of this against conservatives.
The bill additionally states that defamation lawsuits can be filed in any county for internet content and any county where “the material was accessed” for television and radio. “The entire premise of your bill is to make it easier to sue,” Radel said.
Andrade denied this and that there were any “chilling” effects: “If this made it easier to sue I wouldn’t file it. It’s extremely easy for someone to file a lawsuit. But like, as a lawyer, I also know if I bring a frivolous defamation lawsuit, I’m on the hook for attorney fees and costs.”
He said there’s a defamatory “open season” on public figures. “Trust in the media is at an all-time low,” Andrade said. “It’s at an all-time low for a reason. No self-regulation.”
Not just Trey Radel
Radel obviously wasn’t satisfied with Andrade’s answers. After the lawmakers left the airwaves, the host encouraged listeners to reach out to legislative leadership.
Featured prominently on the website of his channel, 92.5 Right All Along — which has a time slot for conservative commentator Sean Hannity — is a call to stop the proposal. “While the intentions are noble, talk radio and conservative media could be hit the hardest,” the website reads.
It recommends an email template to ask lawmakers to vote no, which includes, “These bills make filing defamation suits easier for both sides, but guess who will get crushed? Conservative media outlets! These bills have other unconstitutional problems but are not as important as this point.”
This legislation is moving at the same time that former President Donald Trump has been ordered by a federal civil jury to pay $83 million to advice columnist E. Jean Carroll for defamation.
In a Tuesday op-ed published by Florida Politics, Drew Steele, who has the 6 a.m to 9 a.m. timeslot on 92.5, wrote that the measure opens “a Pandora’s box of threats that imperil a vibrant marketplace of ideas.”
Not just conservative media
It’s not just conservative media speaking against the legislation.
During a recent appearance on Steele’s show, GOP U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds of Naples said, “I don’t really think we need to get into this kind of stuff. In politics ... they spit hot fire. If you don’t want to deal with that, you shouldn’t be in politics.”
Chris Stranburg, the legislative affairs director for Americans for Prosperity-Florida, a libertarian conservative political advocacy group, warned it would “have a significant chilling effect on speech.”
Andrade says frivolous lawsuits would run into what are known as antiSLAPP protections, geared at preventing lawsuits filed simply because someone dislikes another’s speech. But Stranburg not only disagrees but believes the proposal would weaken those protections by lowering defamation standards.
Stranburg’s remarks came when the Senate version of the legislation (SB 1780) came up at a committee meeting last week. A short while before, a representative of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida also spoke against the bill, saying its “overly broad and vague” language would be unconstitutional.
“This is the first time I’ve heard a bill in many, many years where you have the ACLU and Americans for Prosperity jointly opposing,” said Sen. Gayle Harrell, R-Stuart. “This is record setting, I believe ... I will support (the bill) today with the promise that there will be continued work on it.”
Both groups also opposed similar proposals last year that didn’t go the distance, despite having been a priority of Gov. Ron DeSantis. Conservative media officials, including Radel, also spoke against those.
The House version of the Legislation has passed two of its three assigned committees.
The Senate bill only has to pass one more committee before it is sent to the floor for final votes.
Spokespeople for DeSantis did not respond to a question on whether he supports this year’s legislation. But he held a televised roundtable last year in which he discussed “the damaging impacts of defamation from the legacy media as it becomes a more prevalent issue in the lives of everyday citizens.”
This reporting content is supported by a partnership with Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. USA Today Network-Florida First Amendment reporter Douglas Soule is based in Tallahassee, Fla.
He can be reached at DSoule@gannett.com. On X: @DouglasSoule.