About Libel
Webster's dictionary defines libel as: (1) a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt; (2) defamation of a person by written or representational means; (3) the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures; and (4) the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel.
By law, libel comes under the umbrella of defamation. Defamation when written or in the form of a representation such as a photograph is considered libel; when defamation is spoken, it is slander.
Other People Are Reading
-
The Facts
-
According to the Media Law Resource Center, generally under U.S. law with some variations from state to state, the following criteria have to be met for a libel claim to be valid:
1. The alleged defamatory statement must have been published to at least one more person, and it must be clear to those hearing or reading it to whom the defamatory statement refers.
2. The alleged statement must be defamatory and actually harmful to the reputation of the person involved, not just offensive or insulting.
3. The statement must be false of fact that can be be proved true or false. Hyperbole or any sort of name calling will not qualify as a false statement of fact.
4. The alleged defamatory statement must have been made by fault or on purpose. The extent of fault for which the defendant will be held liable depends on whether the plaintiff is a public or private figure. Public figures such as elected officials or celebrities need to prove that the statement was malicious. Malice is a legal term which means that the defendant knew his statement was false and made it anyway in reckless disregard of the truth. Private individuals need only to prove that the defendant was negligent in making the false statement.
History of
-
The history of the law governing libel and defamation in general dates back to Roman jurisprudence, which serves as the basis for most of Western law. Between the 1500s and 1800s, seditious libel was a common charge in England and the United States. It was used in connection with defamatory statements allegedly made against the government. As sedition gradually became separate from libel, it became less common for the government to file libel suits even though some government officials filed such suits individually.
-
Features
-
There are two kinds of libel: direct (per se) and indirect (per quod). Direct libel is when a person directly makes a statement that ridicules another, while indirect is when the statement makes implied ridicule of another.
The following can be used as defenses against libel:
1. Truth. In the United States, if it is true, then it is not libel.
2. Privilege. Statements made in a court room or the floor of a legislative body have absolute privilege. If these statements are quoted by a newspaper for example, the newspaper and reporters quoting such statements are protected by qualified privilege. Under broadcast law, the Equal Time Rule protects stations carrying the statements of public officials or people running for office and grants such stations absolute privilege.
3. Fair comment and criticism. Comments made in editorial and opinion pieces on the public performance of public figures who voluntarily put themselves in the limelight are protected by law as long as the statements are specific and precise, can be verified, are in an understood literary context (think The Onion versus the New York Times), and are in an understood public context (e.g., the conduct of candidates running for office in an election).
Other defenses used against libel are retraction, neutral reportage, statute of limitations and death.
Risk Factors
-
The following cannot be used as a defenses against libel:
1. Using the word "allegedly." "Allegedly" as a qualifier by law does not change the statement it qualifies. "He allegedly stole" is the same thing as saying "he stole."
2. Official attribution. Just because the police says they arrested somebody for murder does not mean that the person committed the crime. The best way to report that would be: "The police arrested John Doe in connection with the murder," or "The police have charged John Doe with murder" (if he has indeed been charged).
3. Off-the-record attribution. Such comments cannot be proved in a court of law and therefore cannot be used as a defense against libel. It is one person's word against another's.
4. Claims of opinion. This cannot protect in a libel suit. Saying "In my opinion, she is a prostitute" without proof of fact that she is a prostitute is still a malicious statement of fact.
5. Unofficial court documents. Documents such as affidavits are not covered by privilege until they have been admitted into evidence and therefore cannot be a defense in a libel suit.
Significance
-
The issue of libel in the United States is closely connected to the First Amendment and freedom of speech and what an entity or individual has the right to say or publish about another. Libel suits are usually brought to defend a ruined reputation or for vengeance. Lawyers who specialize in this area of law are called First Amendment lawyers. All who care about freedom of speech closely monitor and advocate against cases that in any way would result in censorship.
In the United States, the burden lies on the plaintiff to prove that the defamatory statement is false. In Europe, the burden lies on the defendant to prove that a statement is true.
With the Internet being the new frontier of publishing, future libel suits will most likely clarify the law with respect to the Internet. Cases decided so far have absolved operators of chat rooms, for example, of the responsibility to monitor or censor what is being said on their sites. Individuals are responsible for their statements.
-
