Welcome back, everyone in my MCOM 101 class.
We’ll be focusing this week on chapter 14 “Law and Regulation.”
Part of that chapter covers libel law.
But what is libel? And why do we look at it in the context of First Amendment law?
A quick bottom line definition of libel is this: Libel is defamatory, false, published information about a named or otherwise identified person.
In libel cases, we have a plaintiff and we have a defendant.
The plaintiff is the person who thinks he/she has been libeled or damaged by the media.
The defendant is the person who wrote the article about the allegedly defamed person; the defendant can also be the medium (newspaper, magazine, movie, website…) where the expression/article appeared.
When a plaintiff files a libel suit against a defendant, the plaintiff must prove four things before he/she can prevail or win in the lawsuit:
Publication. Means the material had to be published somewhere. Publication has been defined loosely by the courts to mean that if THREE or more people read/see material, then it is published. Does material appearing in an article in The Whitetopper (the student newpaper at Emory & Henry College) constitute publication? Yes! What about an e-mail that student A sends to student B (but Student B does not share with anyone else)? That would not be “publication” because only two people saw the message. But if student B forwards/shares student A’s e-mail with at least one other person, well, that’s a whole different kettle of fish, ladies and gentlemen!
2. Identification. Means that in addition to proving that material was published about her, the plaintiff has to prove that she was IDENTIFIED, by name or otherwise, in that published material.
Example: Say someone thinks they have been defamed (humiliated or embarrassed) through an article published in The Whittopper. The article in question is about gays and lesbians at Emory & Henry College. It mentions no one’s name and in no way identifies anyone in particular. It is a general overview article about gays and lesbians at our college. Someone quoted in the article says something very, very degrading against gays and lesbians. Ralph Z. Ralphson, a gay student at EHC, reads the article and really becomes angry at The Whitetopper and at the student who wrote the article. Ralph sues for libel. Will he win this lawsuit against the newspaper and the writer?
Then, again, still focusing on the element of identification, consider that The Whitetopper runs an article about cheerleaders at EHC. The article mentions no one’s name on the cheerleading squad, but it does assert that at least one of the EHC cheerleaders is a prostitute. Here’s where the situation concerning I.D. gets tricky. Small group of potential libel plaintiffs? If the group is relatively small, even though no one is named in particular in an article, careful! (How many cheerleaders are there at the ball games at EHC?) All of the members of the small group might sue the newspaper for libel (or maybe only one member will sue.)
There’s great risk here cause the group is relatively small.
You may be wondering what happens if the newspaper reporter accurately quotes someone (and has that someone on a recording) saying that one of the cheerleaders is a prostitute. Yes, the reporter has been accurate, but the quote still might be held as grounds for a successful libel suit. Keep reading to understand why.
3. Defamation: (rhymes, curiously, with defecation) Means in essence that the published article about a person identified in the article also defames that person. Defames means that the person was greatly humiliated, hurt, embarrassed or had his/her good name or reputation damaged. Defamation also might mean the published material caused the plaintiff to lose wages or friends or business customers or even his/her job.
The Whitetopper (or any other student newspaper) could possibly defame a student. But how could the student PROVE that he/she had been defamed? Think about that question for a moment. If you thought you had been defamed, how would you go about proving it in a court of law?
Remember: Probably the most precious thing we have in life is our good name or reputation. We work to protect that every day of our lives, don’t we? And then along comes a reporter who writes a defamatory article about us. Bad news all the way around!
4. Falsity: In addition, to PROVING that published material about him/her is defamatory and identifies her/him in the article, a libel plaintiff must prove, to win a libel case, that the material published is false. If, on the other hand, the published defamatory material is true, the libel plaintiff can’t win the case. But she may be able to prevail in an invasion of privacy lawsuit. (More about invasion of privacy in another blog post).
Summary: To win a libel case, the person suing the media and or reporter for libel must PROVE the following elements: Publication, Identification, Defamation, Falsity. Lest all those are proved by the plaintiff (person bringing suit) the plaintiff cannot win.
Okay, one more thing (and it’s a big thing that everyone should read about in the AP Style book or some other good reference book on First Amendment law.)
When it comes to public officials or public figures, these sorts of people must prove something called “actual malice”
to win a libel case against the media.
Public officials or public figures must ALSO, of course, prove the same things that private (nonpublic) people must prove: Publication, Identification, Defamation, and Falsity.
So the burden of proof, to win a libel case, is higher for public officials/figures as opposed to private individuals who pretty much keep to themselves.
What, for purposes of libel law, is a private person?
For purposes of the law, what’s a public official or public person?
(Do some research and reading and find out!)
So what is “actual malice.”
Actual malice means knowledge of falsity OR reckless disregard for the truth. Does not have to mean both. It means knowledge of falsity OR reckless disregard for the truth.
Okay, so what does knowledge of falsity mean?
What’s the meaning of reckless disregard for the truth?
Do some research and find out. (Or remind me to explain these terms in class).
Also, while you’re at it, look up the famous court case titled:
New York Times v. Sullivan
It’s probably the most famous First Amendment law case in history. It established the “actual malice” standard that public officials must prove to win a libel case against the news media.
Enough for now about libel.
More about First Amendment law in another blog post.
No comments:
Post a Comment