The Concept Of Libel Essay Example for Free

The Concept Of Libel Essay This thesis seeks to look at the constituents of libel and distinguished from slander. The paper shall therefore begin by laying down a definition of the term libel and later look at the key elements that ought to be proved in a libel suit in reference to the New York Times Co. V. Suillivan suit and lastly look at the defenses that exist and the place of press ombudsman in handling libel cases. The laws of different jurisdictions have laid down distinctions between libel (a written defamation) and/or slander (an oral defamation). This thesis looks into defamation indepthly. Defamation has been defined in general terms as a communication which exposes a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt, lowers such persons esteem, causes him to be shunned or injures him in his business or calling. (Phelps and Hamilton; 1966). It is therefore any written communication that holds a person up to contempt hatred, ridicule or scorn, thus in establishing a case of libel, one must proof that words published actually damaged the reputation of the person. (Roger V. Jackson Sun Newspaper 23 M. L. R. 1670 [1995]) and that at lease a significant minority of the community belief that as a result of these publications the plaintiff has been damaged. (Saudner V. WHYY TV, 382 A 2d. 257, [1998]). Injury that amounts from Libel is viewed in numerous ways. The injury may be as to have only hurt the reputation or it may have lowered ones reputation as to deprive them off their rights to enjoy social contacts. On the other hand, a person’s ability to hold a job or make a living may also be injured. (Yankwich; 1956) A person thus needs to show that they have been injured in one of the three ways for compensations to occur in libel suits. The institution of civil action for libel can be brought by any person however in instances where such persons die, it is a general principle that libel suits can not proceed or be instituted. However, the enactment of survival statutes in some jurisdictions has enabled relatives to proceed with such suits in instances where the plaintiff dies. In examining the locus standi of incorporated business they are entitled to actions for libel, however, cities, countries and agencies for the American government and governments the general can not excise loci standi in libel quite (City of Chicago . v. tribune publishing co. 139 n. e. 2d 86 [1923]) . The concept of burden of proof heavily lies on the plaintiff in libel cases. He must establish five key element of which this section shall delve into briefly before the law recognizes a statement and /or comment as being civil libel, it must be published According to law, publication occurs when one person, in addition to the writer and person who is defamed hear or see the material. Oftenly publication in newspapers or broadcast on television is presumed to have been disclosed to third parties. (Hornby. v. Hunter 385 S. W 2d 473 [1964]). Secondly the injured party must show the court that the exclusion of his name on the list of his best selling book was defamatory was held not to have validity as it had not specified his name in the list. The plaintiff must therefore be identified in the New York Times . v. Sullivan; the Montgomery police commissioner sought damages for false defamatory statement about the conduct of the Montgomery police department though he was never named in the ad. He contended that the comments on behavior of police also reflected on him. It was however established that plaintiff fell under the definition of all-purpose public figure whose job occupation is that of pervasive power and influence they are deemed public figures. Thirdly the examination of words as to constitute defamatory language is of essence . In libel cases, words are ordinarily considered in light of their ordinary meaning unless the evidence is persuasive as to show that the defendant meant something else(Mc Bride . v. Mewell Dow). Libel plaintiff must generally prove that the defamatory statements are false. This concept of falsity however differs with regards to public and private entities. In this case, if the plaintiff is a private person, they must prove the falsity of the libelous statement only when the subject matter is a matter of public concern (Philadelphia news paper Inc. v. Hepps). In the new York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the US court unanimously reversed the decision in this case stating that Sullivan could not recover damages in the case unless he proved that the defendant published false and defamatory advertisement knowingly or that the paper exhibited reckless disregard for the truth when it printed the material. The proof of reckless disregard for the truth was established in Garrison. v. Louisiana , by proving that the defendant had a high degree of awareness of probable falsity. The defenses that lie within a libel suit fall under the enactment of the first Amendment that establish the freedom for airing one’s opinion. However a person cannot also sue for libel if he or she has consented to the publication of the defamatory material (Pressley. v. Continental Can co. ). In another case, defense falls under the concept of right to reply which is mostly interpreted as a self-defense concept where if a person has written defamatory statements about another party, such party may reply in defense. Reference: American Law Institute: 379 U. S. 64(1964). Restatement of Tort 2 ed, Philadelphia American Law. Ashley, P. Say it safely. 5th ed. Seuttle University of Washington Press 1976. D,H. B. Libel law Doesn’t Work. But can it be fixed and in what price? Libel law and freedom of the press; Marton. L. New York(1993). Phelps, Robert, and Douglas Hamilton, Libel. New York:Macmillan 1966. Sinolla,Rodney. Suing the Press, New York: Oxford University Press,1986.