Yeah, and the US definition of libel is incredibly narrow, especially for public figures. Basically, unless you can prove they intentionally lied, forget it. As the Rolling Stone demonstrated, they can go into a story with a pre-existing bias against the subject, skip normal journalistic checks, conceal from readers just how weak the story is and how much it relies on a single source, and say something false and damaging, and that's still not enough; the only thing they could be got on was the odd technicality of counting adding a note to the story after they knew it was wrong as republishing it.
