Libel Law: Aggregated Stories' Legal Liability

Libel law refers to the publication of false statements that damage someone's reputation. Libel is a form of defamation expressed in print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any other physical form of communication. It is important to note that an opinion is not considered libel, as libel specifically refers to facts that can be proven untrue. While truth is a defence against libel, it is important to note that re-publishing or re-broadcasting a libelous statement can also subject an individual to a libel lawsuit. In the context of aggregated stories, it is crucial to examine the specific statements, the extent of their publication, and the harm caused to an individual's reputation to determine if libel laws apply.

Libel law and the First Amendment

Libel is a form of defamation expressed in print, writing, pictures, or any other physical form that is injurious to a person's reputation. Libel laws exist in every state in the US, though the specifics vary. Libel is considered a violation of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, the First Amendment also provides defendants in the United States with a measure of protection from defamation lawsuits.

In the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that public officials could only win a libel lawsuit if they could demonstrate "actual malice" on the part of the publisher, meaning that the publisher knew the information was false or showed a reckless disregard for whether it was false or not. This ruling established a national standard for libel and changed the nature of libel law in the United States.

The Supreme Court has also ruled that truth is an absolute defense against defamation, meaning that true statements, even if damaging to someone's reputation, are not considered libel. Opinions are generally protected under the First Amendment, though this protection is not absolute. To be considered an opinion and receive protection, a statement must be about a matter of public concern, expressed in a way that makes it difficult to prove its truth or falsehood, and cannot be reasonably interpreted as a factual statement.

The clash between defamation law and the First Amendment can lead to expensive litigation and negative public views of the press. Defamation suits can have a chilling effect on free speech, as people may avoid making statements, even if they are true, for fear of being sued. On the other hand, the press has an important role in reporting on issues of public concern, and individuals have a right not to be subjected to falsehoods that harm their reputation.

Libel vs. slander

Libel and slander are both types of defamation. Defamation is a false statement that harms a person's reputation. Libel is a written form of defamation, while slander is an oral form. Libel can be in the form of writing, pictures, cartoons, or any other medium that exposes a person to public hatred, shame, disgrace, or ridicule. Slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken out loud, such as at a town hall meeting or a professional conference.

The distinction between libel and slander has blurred with the advent of technology. For example, it is unclear whether a podcast is slander (oral communication) or libel (written script). Similarly, text messages could be considered either a conversation (slander) or a blog post (libel). Courts are divided on how to characterise broadcast speech and digital communication as slander or libel. Most courts now focus on the permanence and reach of the defamatory statement. Statements that are permanent and widely distributed are typically considered libel, while fleeting statements made to a smaller audience are considered slander.

In the United States, each state has its own libel and slander laws, but the basics are the same across all states. To win a defamation lawsuit, a plaintiff must show that the defendant made an "unprivileged" false statement of fact to a third party, which harmed the plaintiff's reputation or caused other compensable losses. Private figures must show that the defendant acted "negligently", meaning they did not bother to find out if the statement was true or false. On the other hand, public figures must prove that the defendant acted with "actual malice", meaning the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

Libel defences

Libel is the publication of false statements that damage someone's reputation. Libel laws don't just apply to journalists—anyone can be sued for libel. In the US, each state has its own libel laws, but the basics are the same across the country. Most libel cases are civil, with the person who believes they've been wronged suing the publisher of the statement.

Truth

The defence of truth applies if the defendant can show that the imputation conveyed by the statement is "substantially true". The defendant must prove this on the balance of probabilities, meaning that the fact in issue more probably occurred than not. It is not necessary to show that every allegation is true, but that the allegations that were not true did not materially damage the claimant's reputation.

Honest Opinion

The defence of honest opinion aims to balance the protection of reputation with the preservation of freedom of expression. For this defence to be successful, the statement must be an opinion, the basis of the opinion must be indicated, and an honest person could have held the opinion based on any fact existing at the time of publication. The court has recognised that this defence should protect genuinely held opinions.

Public Interest

The defendant can show that the statement was on a matter of public interest and that they reasonably believed that publishing the statement was in the public interest.

Consent

If the plaintiff consents to the publication of a defamatory matter about them, this consent is an absolute defence to a defamation action.

Absolute Privilege

Absolute privilege provides a complete defence to a defamation claim, even when the allegation is untrue or malicious. Absolute privilege applies to parliamentary proceedings, reports of judicial proceedings, statements made by one officer of state to another during the course of official duty, and statements contained in reports of various statutory officers and bodies.

Qualified Privilege

Qualified privilege applies to statements made to protect a legitimate interest, so if the defendant is defending themselves from a false accusation, providing the statements were made in good faith and are relevant to the issues. To defeat a defence of qualified privilege, a claimant must show that the defendant acted maliciously in publishing the words complained of.

Libel and social media

Libel is a form of defamation that involves permanent forms of publication, such as written statements, pictures, or any other medium that leaves a record. With the rise of social media, it has become easier for defamatory content to reach a wider audience, and for libel to occur. Libel on social media can take the form of text, images, videos, or any other content that can be shared and seen by the public.

To be considered libel, the published content must meet certain criteria. Firstly, the statements or claims made must be false. Secondly, the content must have the potential to harm the reputation of the subject. Lastly, the content must be shared or published to a third party, and not just the claimant.

If someone is a victim of libel on social media, there are several steps they can take to address the situation. They can gather evidence by taking screenshots or finding other ways to preserve the false statements. They can then contact the person directly and request that they stop spreading the defamatory content. Most social media platforms have policies against misinformation and false statements, so reporting the content to the platform and requesting its removal is also an option.

If the libel has caused significant harm, such as damage to reputation or financial loss, the victim may want to consider legal action. Consulting a lawyer can help determine if there is a viable defamation claim, and they can provide representation in court if necessary. It is important to note that suing someone can be costly and time-consuming, so all options should be carefully considered before taking legal action.

Libel and public figures

Libel is a form of defamation expressed in writing, pictures, or other physical forms that can be injurious to a person's reputation. Libel laws vary across different jurisdictions, and in the US, each state has its own libel laws. However, the basics of libel law are the same across the country. Libel is the publication of false statements that damage someone's reputation.

When it comes to public figures, the law treats defamation claims differently. The Supreme Court has defined public figures as those who hold government office or have achieved prominence in society due to their notable achievements or active pursuit of public attention. The Court's definition of a public figure is crucial in determining whether a plaintiff is a "public figure" for defamation purposes.

In the context of defamation, a public figure must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice in making the defamatory statement. This means that the publisher knew the statement was false or showed a reckless disregard for the truth. This standard was set by the Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) and affirmed in Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts (1967). The Court reasoned that this higher burden of proof was necessary to foster uninhibited debate on public issues and matters of public concern.

On the other hand, private figures are ordinary individuals who have not sought public attention. They only need to prove that the defendant was negligent in making the defamatory statement, which is a lower burden of proof. This distinction highlights the courts' recognition that private figures' reputations deserve greater protection and that they may rely solely on the court system to contest defamatory statements.

The different standards for public and private figures exist to encourage public debate and free discussion about individuals in the public eye and contentious issues of public concern. Public figures are generally considered to have greater access to the media to counter defamatory statements, whereas private figures may need the courts' protection to safeguard their reputations.

Frequently asked questions