1

Alisia Watts

Professor Guffey

Communication Law and Ethics

22 February 2020

The First Amendment: Defamation

The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States is one of the most valued

and important writings in history. The first amendment defined our country and shaped it to

what it is today. The amendment has been constantly challenged and changed through

literature, court cases and media. The first amendment drives the media and plays a huge role.

Press freedom is the right to report, without government censorship. Americans enjoy press

freedom as one of the natural born rights in the First Amendment. New technologies and

advances have made new challenges for media freedom and the freedom of the press.

Defamation is a part of the law that provides a civil fix when the words of someone end

up harming your reputation or your livelihood. For example falsely accusing someone of

committing a crime claiming that someone has a contagious disease; or statements claiming

that the person is unfit or incapable of performing his duties at work.

Libel is defamatory statements images published in print or writing, or broadcasted in

the media, such as on radio, on television, or in films. To qualify as a libel, the publication does

not need to be made to more than one person. Although it has to be represented as a fact

though, not an opinion. It just has to damage the reputation of an individual.

The defamatory oral statements are classified as slander. Damage to slander is more

difficult to identify and to prove. Although it can be easier to accomplish when malice is
 2

involved. These statements must also be factual to be considered slanderous, rather than an

opinion. So defamation is broken up into two categories; written in libel and slander is spoken.

Until the second half of the 1900's, it was not protected by the amendment.

In specific cases defamation is also prohibited by law. Press defamation is termed a libel.

In the New York Times v. Sullivan landmark case of 1964, the court ruled that the press is not

guilty of libel against public figures unless the injured party is able to prove the actual malice.

The ruling lifted press restrictions that had prevented it from fully reporting on the Civil Rights

movement in the South. The New York Times published an ad for contributing donations to

defend Martin Luther King, Jr., on charges of perjury during the Civil Rights movement of the

1960s.

The Commissioner for Public Safety at the City, L.B. Sullivan, felt his subordinates'

criticism reflected on him, even though he was not mentioned in the ad. Sullivan sent a written

request to the Times to retract the information publicly, as required by Alabama law for a

public figure to seek punitive damages in a libel action.

Sullivan filed a libel suit against the Times and a group of African American ministers

mentioned in the ad when the Times refused and claimed they were puzzled by the request. A

State court jury awarded him $500,000 in damages. He was affirmed by the state supreme

court and the Times appealed.

After reviewing the facts, the errors in the ad and the judgments of the lower court, Judge

Brennan announced that the court had found that the rule of law applied by the courts of

Alabama did not uphold the freedom of speech. Brennan quickly disposed of Sullivan’s reliance
 3

on earlier decisions of the court and cited several previous cases that had expanded the

parameters of First Amendment protection. The court ruled in later decisions that the press can

still be found guilty of libel in defamation cases involving private citizens and private matters

without proof of actual malice. (Legal Information Institute,“Libel,” n.d.)

Until well into the 20th century, these common law concepts provided the basis for the

libel and slander laws. While these laws varied, they generally let it be known that a plaintiff for

libel or slander would have to prove four elements to prevail: publication, identification, harm,

and fault. Each of the four elements needs proof.

A statement is "published" when it is passed on to someone other than the person that
the statement is about. Publication can be in many forms, and does not just mean that the
statement was printed in a newspaper or other document. For instance, the presence of a
defamatory statement on a computer screen in the newsroom where it is being read by others
could be a publication.

A statement "identifies" a person if it is shown to be concerned" with that person.

Where you leave out or alter the identity of a subject, they are unable to sue you for libel. No
matter the story, the story should state what facts have been altered.

Individuals can be defamed; they cannot be groups of people. The key question is
whether it is reasonable to interpret a statement about a group to refer to a specific individual
within that group. While there is no hard rule, some courts have suggested that individual
members of a group larger than 25 will have a hard time proving they have suffered individual
damages.

On the other hand, people in a smaller group may be able to claim they have damaged
their reputation. For example, if a team consists of just 12 members, the generic statement,
"The sports team is being investigated for substance abuse," could cause a publication to a libel
suit.

A statement is harmful if it shames, mocks, disgraces or harms the reputation of a

person or causes others to do so. The "harm" test will not be met by statements which could
 4

cause significant harm to the reputation of a person. For example statements about improper
sexual behavior. Someone having a disease, illegal behavior, etc.

To be at fault in publishing a statement, the suing person must prove that either the
reporter has done something they should not have done, or that they have not done something
they should have done. If the reporter does everything a reasonable person should have done
before publishing it to verify the information in their article. For example,if they talk to all sides,
get and read all relevant things pertaining to it, take factual and good notes, etc. they are not
at fault legally.

People suing for libel who are public officials or public figures have to prove a higher
level of fault than a regular person. For a public official or figure to prove defamation, they
must prove actual malice. “Actual malice requires that the person suing prove that the
challenged statement was published by those who either knew it was false or were reckless in
verifying its accuracy.” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 1964).

The Supreme Court defines a public official as one who, has or appears to the public,
and has a substantial responsibility for or control over governmental affairs. There are two
categories: General Purpose Public Figure which could be a celebrity, whose name is used a lot
or holds a significant value. As well as Limited Purpose Public Figure which is someone who has
voluntarily taken the lead in a certain public controversy. A private person only needs to prove
that the reporter made a mistake.

Defamation, may take the form of libel or slander, and is one of the more high profile
and controversial areas of tort law. This is because the tort brings together the competing
imperatives of “protection of reputation” and “freedom of expression”, and raises interesting
questions about where the balance between the two is to be struck.

Defamation can take the form of libel or slander, and is one of tort law's highest profile
and debatable fields. The conflicting vital importance of reputation security and freedom of
expression raises interesting questions and thoughts about where to find a balance between
the two.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Defamation, Slander and Libel. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2020, from
 5

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-slander-libel

History.com Editors. (2018, August 21). Freedom of the Press. Retrieved from

https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/freedom-of-the-press

Hudson, D. L. (2002 13). Libel & Defamation. Retrieved from

https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/topics/freedom-of-

the-press/libel-defamation/

Libel. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2020, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/libel

New York Times Company v. Sullivan. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved February 26, 2020, from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1963/39

Student Press Law Center. (2001, June 1). Student Press Law Center | Four elements of libel

law. Retrieved from https://splc.org/2001/06/libel-law/

Urofsky, M. I. (n.d.). New York Times Co. v. Sullivan - The Supreme Court’s ruling.Retrieved

February 26, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/event/New-York-Times-Co-v-

Sullivan/The-Supreme-Courts-ruling