IT'S NOT A CENSORSHIP!
Exactly, surely everybody can see that!
So, I want to write an article about puella the politician that is accurate, but maybe doesn't show puella from a favourable perspective for whatever reason. So puella looks at it and says "no I don't approve" and therefore it can't be published - at least not as it is.
No, that would be perfectly legal, but if on the other hand you decided to take her words out of context and distort them, and she says to you no teffle, you are a complete liar that is not what i said, she would be perfectly within her rights to object.
Having the law act only in retrospect as you propose, is quite stupid, because by that time some falsehood by a slick journo looking for a quick kill, could ruin someone's career or life and then it would be too late.
Take the UK media as an example, and think to yourself how much rubbish, downright lies and distortion, passes for serious journalism.
So just because the United Federation of Self Promoting Journalists happens not to like something, this doesn't make their opinion sacred.
I am not sure how it is in Ireland, But take a look at the UK and see how the political agenda is increasingly set by the press and not the politicians. In the UK the politicians are literally petrified of going against the grain and following their convictions because of the press. Let's face it, in the UK the tabloids have debased the the very currency of politics, and some journalists Like Paxman think it is their duty to be as rude and obnoxious as possible when interviewing politicians! He looks as though he has a plate of **** in front of his nose during every interview he conducts. And then they have the effrontery to ask why the public is so disillusioned by politics!