Ummm how exactly would it be hard to prove malice in this case? Kluwe directly states in his article that his intentions for writing it is to ensure that Priefer be fired and never receive another NFL job based on his "bigotry". If the claims of his bigotry are lies fabricated by Kluwe, malice is proven by the article itself.J. Kapp 11 wrote: Nonsense. Priefer has no case for libel against Kluwe. Priefer is considered a public figure, for whom libel laws change dramatically. If Priefer were a common citizen, he would only have to prove that Kluwe's statements were false. But for a public figure like Priefer to prove libel, he has to not only show that Kluwe's comments were false, but ALSO that actual malice was the reason for stating the falsehood. Basically, he has to prove in a court of law that Kluwe's false comments were made for the sole purpose of smearing Mike Priefer. No matter what any of us believe about Kluwe's comments, that is very hard to prove in court.
No, instead of handling his perceived injustice like an adult, Chris Kluwe did what he always does. He took the juvenile route and went to Deadspin. Like a jilted kid in middle school, he spread rumors instead of confronting the person, or speaking with somebody who could actually address his concerns. Sounds an awful lot like "haters gonna hate."
I think many people are going to take issue with the way Kluwe handled the situation, because it does not adhere to the social norms of what is expected of someone who has an issue within the work place. But as I've stated before, these are not things that Kluwe is concerned with. His agenda it to bring as much attention to this issue as possible, and that agenda has been fulfilled. He has brought awareness to the media and public of the issue, and by doing so, those who actually can address the concerns are also aware, and have already publicly stated they are investigating the incident. And not only that, but they are also under more pressure and scrutiny to make the proper decision and set a new course of action to ensure these issues do not repeat themselves. This is the idea of being an activist, not just fixing his own personal issue with an employee, but attempting to make a change to a system that has allowed this conduct to happen in the first place.
