This can be one hell of a slippery slope for liable and freedom of speech. Both sides have legitimate issues. But what if it comes into law that saying anything negative about a business is unlawful?
This has occurred in some states and even Oregon passed such a law involving negative speech about the smell of feeder lots in cattle country.
It always boils down to control.

However, the false news did create an excellent buying opportunity for any investors who were poised to play the movement.

Old tricks for new dogs.

I am stunned that the price went back up when the blogger retracted the false news. I mean, talk about getting the cat back in the bag!

Oddly reminiscent of this:
https://bojack.org/2007/11/stiffed_by_hillary.html

talk about getting the cat back in the bag

That's just it. There was no cat. Only the bag.

Cat in the bag...no cat, only the bag.
---------

Well, somebody lost more than cats and bags. People sold stock and lost money that day. Others bought stock and made money that day. Long term investors who did nothing that day did fine (ignorance was bliss that day).

Info moves markets. Regardless if the info is real or imaginary, or retracted or not. As long as there is money to be made, this will always keep happening.

I wonder if the people who published the erroneous information made any money by trading Apple stock?