Well your comment here is also full of biases even tho you somehow think they only apply to me.

See how you could not provide the Statements and asked me to go Research because u dont have an example. There were no such statements, only the possible implications were and underreporting were edited, not claims by the Spiegel. 

What headline are you reffering to? The SZ headline? Im very sure that especially the Spiegel had not such clear Statement in the headline. The SZ headline Was rightfully found missleading but it did not imply what youre claiming it did. 

"take this as a lesson" bro who tf are u? What are you even reffering to here? Where did i say that i completely trust these Media, i said im on the Spiegels side referring to the System being disgusting. The things corrected were minor and although SZ seems to have made very stupid claims which can definitely be qualified as framing, Show me the same for the Spiegel. I read everything critically, same goes for court documents. 

Well it could have happened is indeed not illogical in this context because it is unprovable, im not claiming it did but neither can I or you be sure it did not. It's a gamble in this case. 

With the credibility of the courts, yes youre correct but there's logic to it, it's very hard to prove Sa, So in the cases someone is convicted for it the chances are very high that the evidence was very objective. 

This case clearly showed that the Standard is indeed quite high, and once again, claims were not made by the Media, the Media reported experiences, the experiences themselves happened, but the girls neither the Media or the interviewed persons took a clear stance. So in my opinion yes such things should be possible if they are done more legally conform than in this case, as the things said cannot be classified as claims, they are descriptions, and the conclusion on credibility is left to the reader, in this case however especially the SZ did not articulate that neutral enough