Why doesn't Elijah Wood simply make his "reading and research" on child abuse in Hollywood public, if he believes abuse is an ongoing concern? [Details]?

In the words of Reggie (from the city). You can say whatever you choose about whomever you choose as long as you are prepared to prove it in court.

1) Defamation lawsuits are expensive
2) He presumably wants to continue to be a working actor.

3) What he said was: “From my reading and research, I’ve been led down dark paths to realize that these things probably are still happening.” This sounds like his information might not be definitive.

4) Some of his research might not be easily shared. Maybe some of it comes from personal discussions with other child actors who made him promise not to repeat the information.

When people claim special knowledge from “reading and research” without saying more, I assume they are reading dumb blogs and/or listening to AM radio.

Why divulge the information for free if one could get paid for it? Otherwise, I think @stanleybmanly has the idea.

I still don’t understand why, if he has enough “reading and research” to publicly make the assertion that there is ongoing sexual abuse in Hollywood, he couldn’t have made that information available to someone in the news media.

He has a reported net worth of $16 million dollars…I don’t think he’s going to go hungry anytime soon.

Elijah Wood: ‘Hollywood in the grip of child abuse scandal similar to Jimmy Savile’

Hm,

”“Let me be clear: This subject of child abuse is an important one that should be discussed and properly investigated. But as I made absolutely clear to the writer, I have no firsthand experience or observation of the topic, so I cannot speak with any authority beyond articles I have read and films I have seen,” Wood continues.”
Source

Sounds like headlines getting ahead of the story, again.

It’s OK, today the local news was spreading fear about domestic terrorism at a Planned Parenthood, and it turned out to be an open bleach bottle and some spilt formula.

That was exactly what I suspected, @Seek, and what prompted my question. Woo was making conversations, not accusation.
I’d not seen follow-up with Wood you posted. Thanks.