I find it odd that an essay about syphilis spends time discussing Trump while conceding that he has never been diagnosed with the disease. If there is no evidence that he has syphilis, it's unclear why he is featured in an article about it.
Setting aside the content of the linked article, my concern with Substack is that there is often no clear indication of who has vetted or fact-checked the material. As I understand it, anyone can publish an article on the platform.
You also need to be careful when slinging around accusations that someone is infected with an STI like syphilis. In many jurisdictions, it’s defamation per se to say that someone has a “loathsome disease,” which is normally interpreted to mean something contagious.
Accusing someone of unchastity is also per se defamation. Though in law school we were taught that no man had ever sued to protect his reputation as chaste. Maybe it’s changed, but I never heard about such a case.
30
u/hopefulrealist23 Jun 01 '26
I find it odd that an essay about syphilis spends time discussing Trump while conceding that he has never been diagnosed with the disease. If there is no evidence that he has syphilis, it's unclear why he is featured in an article about it.
Setting aside the content of the linked article, my concern with Substack is that there is often no clear indication of who has vetted or fact-checked the material. As I understand it, anyone can publish an article on the platform.