What is defamation?
What is libel?
What does SLAPP legislation address?
What is the difference between libel and slander?
Libel is written material where as slander applies to statements made orally.
What are the five things a plaintiff must prove in order to win a libel suit? Define each thing.
1) Publication - One person, other than the source of the libel or the person suing, has to have seen or heard the material.
2) Identification - The injured party must show that the statement was of or concerning him/her/it.
3) Defamation - The statement made must be either libel per se or libel per quod. More specifically, it must lower their reputation in the community. (And be a statement of fact)
4) Falsity - The plaintiff must prove that the statement made by the defendant was false. (In most cases, except for those about a private person on a matter that is not of public concern.)
5) Proof of Fault - The plaintiff must prove actual malice. Simply put, that the publisher had knowledge of falsity or proof that the publisher acted with reckless disregard for the truth. (This applies to public officials/public figures.)
What are the limits to the republication?
1) The Publisher Must Control the content in order to be held liable for republication.
2) A plaintiff can only sue once for libel. Thus, only one publication can be held responsible.
3) Operators of online blogs are not considered publishers for the purpose of third party statements.
What is the Dendrite Test?
Define libel per se and libel per quod.
Libel per se - Words that are on their face defamatory. Think words like thief, liar, cheat, etc.
Libel per quod - Words that are defamatory based on their context. (Think implying things based on the surrounding facts.)
What are the two groups of people dealt with in a libel suit? Define the bounds of each group.
1) Public people - Government officials, leaders of public crusades, prominent entertainers, visible religious or business leaders.
2) Private people - People who are not any of the above.
What speech is a matter of public concern?
How do the matter of public concern and public person designation affect the burden of proof?
1) Courts are lenient about awarding verdicts in favor of plaintiffs when dealing with matters of public concern.
2) A private person designation shifts the burden of proof to the defendant to prove the statements were true and the proof must be clear and definitive.
What did the Court decide in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)?
What must a private person and a public figure prove to prove fault in a libel case?
Private person - Must prove that the material was published through negligence. (The publication failed to exercise reasonable care.)
Public Figure - The actual malice standard.
Who is a public official in libel law?
All Purpose Public Figures - A person who occupies a position of pervasive power and influence in all areas.
Voluntary Limited Purpose Public Figures - A person who thrusts themselves to the forefront of an already existent public controversy in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved.
Involuntary Limited Purpose Public Figures - People drawn into already existent public controversies through unforeseen circumstances.
Public Official - Any elected officer with substantial responsibility for public affairs. Even non-elected officials with budgets qualify under this category. The story must be about the way the person does the job or his or her fitness for office.
What is the question the court will always ask when determining negligence?
Did the reporter make a good faith effort to determine the truth or falsity of the matter? (This involves following general principles of journalistic practice, etc.)
What did the Court decide in Gertz v. Welch (1974)?
What are the three ways a plaintiff can prove reckless disregard for the truth under the actual malice standard?
1) Show the defendant had a high degree of awareness of the probable falsity of the defamatory material when it was published.
2) Provide sufficient evidence to permit the conclusion that the defendant in fact entertained serious doubts as to the truth of the publication.
3) Evidence the defendant purposefully avoided the truth.