Libel and the media Times v. Sullivan ushers in an uncertain new age of press freedom
Elements of libel Defamatory content
Elements of libel Defamatory content Falsity
Elements of libel Defamatory content Falsity Publication
Elements of libel Defamatory content Falsity Publication Identification
Elements of libel Defamatory content Falsity Publication Identification Fault
Elements of libel Defamatory content Falsity Publication Identification Fault Harm
Evolution of libel Falsity was not always an element of libel: The greater the truth, the greater the harm
Evolution of libel Falsity was not always an element of libel: The greater the truth, the greater the harm Fault was not an element of libel until the 1960s — before that, it was a no- fault tort
Evolution of libel Falsity was not always an element of libel: The greater the truth, the greater the harm Fault was not an element of libel until the 1960s — it was a no-fault tort How does requiring fault advance the purpose of the First Amendment?
Can libel = prior restraint? In Near, Chief Justice Hughes wrote that the Minnesota Public Nuisance Law amounted to prior restraint
Can libel = prior restraint? In Near, Chief Justice Hughes wrote that the Minnesota Public Nuisance Law amounted to prior restraint Hughes cited Blackstone on after- the-fact punishment
Can libel = prior restraint? In Near, Chief Justice Hughes wrote that the Minnesota Public Nuisance Law amounted to prior restraint Hughes cited Blackstone on after- the-fact punishment Milton, in the Areopagitica, advocated after-the-fact punishment, including death
Civil rights and libel As with Gitlow v. New York, the Times v. Sullivan decision must be seen within the broader context of the civil-rights movement
Anthony Lewis Wrote Make No Law, a history of Times v. Sullivan Retired New York Times columnist Married to Margaret Marshall, chief justice of Mass. SJC
Ad on King’s behalf Published in New York Times in 1960 Contained several minor errors
Four ministers also sued Rev. Ralph Abernathy (right) with King in Alabama Idea was to keep Sullivan’s suit in state court
Times, ministers lose Found liable in courtroom of judge who presided at re-enactment of Jefferson Davis’s inauguration $500,000 judgment Libel a state matter — or is it?
Times v. Sullivan (1964) Unanimous decision written by William Brennan Says Alabama court’s decision amounts to seditious libel: criticism of government officials Therefore, the Alabama court’s action is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments
William Brennan’s view “[D]ebate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and … it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials”
Actual malice New standard of fault that public officials must show to prove libel
Actual malice New standard of fault that public officials must show to prove libel Knowingly false
Actual malice New standard of fault that public officials must show to prove libel Knowingly false Reckless disregard for the truth
A libel earthquake 1967: Actual malice standard extended to public figures as well as officials
A libel earthquake 1967: Actual malice standard extended to public figures as well as officials 1974: Private figures must at least show negligence to win a libel suit
A libel earthquake 1967: Actual malice standard extended to public figures as well as officials 1974: Private figures must at least show negligence to win a libel suit 1989: Reckless disregard is defined as knowledge of probable falsehood
Disadvantages for media Opens press defendants up to examination as to their state of mind
Disadvantages for media Opens press defendants up to examination as to their state of mind Harms media credibility by creating a cynical attitude among press critics
Disadvantages for public Virtually no recourse for public official or public figure
Case study: Dan Rather A 1980s case very similar to the story that brought him down in 2004 Won by testifying he believed documents were authentic