The proposed changed wording...
At any rate: If you knew that someone was saying there was a fire in a crowded theatre, and you knew that there wasn't a fire in a crowded theatre yet broadcast that there was a fire in a crowded theatre, then you would be in violation because it might endanger the public due to them panicking about the non-fire.
They couldn't say that the moon was made of cheese because that is false. The second bit is for the sake of clarity. If you report that endangers the public based on knowingly false information, then you are liable. If you didn't know it was false, but reported it anyway, there are no repercussions outside of an on air apology.
What this will do is put the onus where it belongs.
Last edited by Krydor; 2011-02-09 at 01:34 PM.
Reason: spelling error missed in proofreading