Who Is Benefitting From Libel Laws?

Libel is a written and published defamatory statement with the purpose of affecting the reputation of the discussed party. The keystone case that started the process for litigation was the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan case. Before this 1964 case, the New York Times was sued 5 times for libel and lost every time. Public officials had a goal to completely bankrupt the corporation, filing libel claims for writing stories that seemed to lean pro-Civl Rights Era. In this landmark Supreme Court decision, the First Amendment protections in the Bill of Rights prohibited public officials from suing for defamatory content.

Currently, the tables are turned in because now it's almost impossible for prosecutors to win libel and defamatory suits, specifically public officials. Presently, in order for a public figure to win a libel case, they must prove "actual malice." Actual malice is aggressively difficult to prove because it requires determining that the writer/publisher was aware of the falsity of the statement given, or they had a reckless disregard for the truth. This is harder to substantiate than negligence ( https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/primers/libellaw/) which just states the party failed to take ordinary or feasible care. Because it is almost impossible to justify actual malice in a court of law, public officials rarely win a libel suit.

This is the dangerous opposite to the 20th century precedent of being able to sue whenever they wanted. Before, government and public figures had too much power, and now I believe the media does. Though there is work being done to reform libel laws, it is hard to determine when a fair outcome for both media outlets and public figures will be reached, if ever at all. However, currently the media seems to be holding most of the cards. On top of the fact that libel laws are extremely difficult for the prosecution to win, even with a successful case, the source of publishing has still changed the perception of the victimized party, however small or large the change may be. And whether intent to ruin a reputation was the goal or not, it is usually reached very easily. So how are current libel laws beneficial for anyone other than the ones making money and changing mindsets with the libelous claims?