All of These Are Among the Three Primary Defenses a Journalist Can Use in a Libel Suit Except...
Journalism is a complex field — it prioritizes the truth, over reputations, feelings, and impressions. As such, U.S law regulates the concept of what journalism entails and the freedom of the press. In all American regions, defamation has substantial financial consequences for any offender. A false statement that causes financial, physical, or emotional harm to another person is considered defamatory.
To prevent further damages, once defamatory statements have been made, it is advised to file a “cease and desist” letter, instructing the individual that you will proceed with legal action if they keep issuing false statements. Below, you will find all of the information you need for pursuing a defamation lawsuit as a journalist.
Journalism and Defamation
In 1964, the Supreme Court defended the fact that the freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment restricts the capacity of American public officials to sue for defamation. If a plaintiff in a defamation lawsuit is a public figure or is in the process of running for office, they must prove the typical elements of defamation in addition to the burden of “actual malice”. These were intended protections to guard members of the public or press who are making assumptions from being subjected to lawsuits.
Establishing proof of malice — New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
- This case was brought by L. B. Sullivan, a police officer who was enraged by a New York Times full-page advertisement that was referenced and authored by supporters of Martin Luther King Jr.
- The ad supposedly incorrectly portrayed the number of times Dr. King had been arrested and portrayed the police in a verbatim “aggressive and incorrect manner”
- Sullivan won the case in Alabama, the New York Times appealed the verdict and the Supreme Court voted unanimously on the fact that the Alabama court’s ruling violated the First Amendment — supporting the freedom of the press and journalists
- The Supreme Court extended the decision’s legal standard for defamation to “all public figures” — setting an immensely high burden of proof
What is actual malice?
- Actual malice is a broad term that can be demonstrated in a plethora of ways, as long as the claim is given in a court of law through evidence-based arguments
- Many circumstances of interaction can be shown in court, including threats, defamatory statements, evidence proving the existence of a rivalry, ill will, or hostility between parties
- All evidence that shows a reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights on behalf of the defendant is typically admissible in court as a defense
- With respect to public officials and government actors, they must bear the burden of proving that a defendant acted against them with actual malice — throughout a trial that presents clear and convincing evidence
To prove actual malice:
You must first validate the fact that the defendant could:
- Have known the implications of and that the statement was false
- Have acted with reckless disregard for the statement’s truth or false, disregarding the individual’s integrity
Who Has to Prove Actual Malice?
Public officials, public figures, and limited-purpose public figures must prove actual malice to win a defamation case:
|Limited-purpose public figures||
When considering defamation law, the law consists of three main facets of defense that pertain to defamation laws, locally and federally. These are:
Absolute privilege or qualified privilege
- Both of these defenses exempt a “speaker” from liability that pertains to publicly defaming another individual
- Absolute privilege pertains to largely public officials
- Qualified Privilege refers to comments made where an individual has specific experience in the industry but does not inherently guarantee immunity for reporters
- Ex. Public Speakers and Officials with governmental duties can insulate themselves from prosecution on the job, with the inclusion of legal repercussions
- Comments made that were perceived to be truthful and aren’t necessarily slanderous with relation to the reporting interest of a journalist
Responsible communication on public importance
- If the public deserves to know about a situation concerning the capacitation or ability of someone who is in the public eye, reporters can use this defense against any cases
Filing a Cease and Desist Letter
If you fall under this criteria and are able to establish a defense — you are able to file a cease and desist letter against the defendant and/or protect yourself from incurring outrageous legal fees as a journalist. Oftentimes, these letters are expensive, difficult to draft, and can incur exponential legal fees. As an easy solution to this, discover how DoNotPay can draft any cease and desist letter for you, instantly!
Let DoNotPay Draft a Cease and Desist Letter in Minutes!
DoNotPay is an easy, trustworthy, and streamlined solution! The cease and desist letter DoNotPay drafts will detail the information about the case, demand retraction, warn against future statements, and will order that the accused abides by local state statutes.
All you need to do is:
1. Look for the Defamation Demand Letters service on DoNotPay.
2. Tell us about your situation:
- Were the statements slander or libel?
- What were the statements?
- Why are they false or misleading?
- What consequences have you suffered as a result of these statements?
3. Based on your location, DoNotPay will immediately generate a formal demand letter on your behalf, with the most relevant state legislation regarding defamation.
That’s it! A cease and desist letter will be ready for download in minutes!
What Else Can DoNotPay Do?
Take a look at what else we can offer: