In effect and combined with site policies regarding user anonymity and acceptable conduct, it ends up protecting commenters, too. Which is why none of us are worried about getting sued for discussing this as we have and which is why you feel so comfortable throwing around the term “scumbags” to describe an entire family instead of specific members of it.
[As I recall, one branch of the family has denounced the criminal behaviour of Purdue and is donating a portion of its wealth not as whitewashing but as a sort of penance – are they scumbags, too?]
If you think that Cory as an official Author on this outlet could just call the entire family “scumbags” without backing up that opinion (in the same way you did) and get away with it, you’re mistaken. As my edit above (made before you replied) indicates, it would be a frivolous action, but so would the action focused on his the use of the guillotine imagery that they were actually threatening (in connection with the much less frivolous action threatened over his omission of “alleged”).
I use the term “scumbag” here a lot, but it’s always backed up and specific to the referenced standard behaviours of individuals (e.g. Richard “addiction is a choice” Sackler) or corporations (e.g. Purdue Pharma, which also can be called “criminal” due to its felony plea) or organisations or industries.
