CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006
description
Transcript of CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 1: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CMCN 345
Communication Law and Ethics
William R. Davie, Ph.D
Lecture 5
Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 2: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Principles and Elements
Defamation Law:
![Page 3: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Libel/Slander
Louisiana Criminal DefamationR.S. 14:47 Defined as “…the malicious
publication or expression in any manner…
1. “To expose any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to deprive him of the benefit of public confidence or social intercourse; or
2. “To expose the memory of one deceased to hatred, contempt, or ridicule; or
3. “To injure any person, corporation, or association of persons in his or their business or occupation.”
PENALTY: Maximum 6 months and $500.00
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 4: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Purpose of Libel Law
Designed to protect reputation.
Good name is precious property.
Public redress by peaceful means.
![Page 5: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
• Publication of defaming message taken as fact?
• Identification of plaintiff?
• Defamatory and False?
• Fault of defendant?
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
Basic Elements of Libel
![Page 6: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Libel/Slander
Defamation Defined
o Reputation (damage to profession or persona)
o Contempt and ridicule (humiliation)
o Hatred (shunned)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 7: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
Key Questions of Libel
Harmful damage to reputation?
-- false and injurious words;
-- exposure to hatred, scorn or ridicule;
-- lowered esteem and/or good will;
-- loss of association, business, etc.
![Page 8: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Two Types of Defamation
Libel Per Se
-- on its face ("by itself") • Crime • Disease • Professional
dishonesty•
Immorality/Unchastity
Libel Per Quod -- by circumstance -- contextual harm to
reputation
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 9: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Is the insult obvious or not?
DEFAMATION Questions???
A significant number of “right minded” audience members have to believe the slur.
Libel or Slander: Print or Broadcast
![Page 10: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Headlines may be libelous; can pictures be libelous as well?
DEFAMATION TO REPUTATION
![Page 11: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Elements of a Libel Claim
Defamation
Identification
![Page 12: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Key Question of Libel:
Identification of defamed?
-- Plaintiff’s name unnecessary;
-- Photos, titles, sketches, initials, other inferences;
-- Group identification:
USA Confidential & Nieman Marcus
Oklahoma Sooners & Inhalants
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 13: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
IDENTIFICATION
Not always by name Even fiction can “identify” No libel against very large
groups (e.g., “politicians”) Case law is mixed concerning
smaller groups
![Page 14: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
Key Question of Libel:
Identification of DEFENDANT?
Internet anonymity requires...
-- Possible “John Doe” litigation;
-- Proof suit will not be dismissed;
-- Extra effort in discovery phase.
![Page 15: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Elements of a Libel Suit:
Publication
Fault
![Page 16: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Key Question of Libel:
Publication of defaming message?
-- Third person heard it.
-- Broadcast or internet counts.
(Any republications?)
-- Bearer of tales as liable as teller of tales.
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 17: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Only one THIRD PARTY must hear
MORE About Publication
Self Publication
![Page 18: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Publication VS Defamation Reputation must be
diminished in MANY minds
PUBLICATION
![Page 19: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
PUBLICATION, continued
Republications are actionable too, with exceptions: Wire services, bookstores,
some internet service providers
Neutral Reportage and FAIR REPORT defenses
![Page 20: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Some Traditional Libel Defenses
Statute of limitations
Truth
![Page 21: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Some Traditional Libel Defenses
Consent
Fair Comment
![Page 22: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Sticks and Stones of Defamation?
o Media costs
o Damages in dollars
o Confusion + Frustration + Media Mistrust = Trouble
o SLAPP Initiatives
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 23: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Look at words’ natural meaning
DEFAMATION
“Libel-proof” plaintiffs(Dr. Kevorkian and Evel Knievel)
![Page 24: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Defamation of Groups, Corporations, & Products
Businesses can sue for libel when accused of dishonest practices, or insolvency.
![Page 25: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Defamation of Groups, Corporations, & Products
Criticism of manufacturer’s motives
Trade libel [or product disparagement]: Falsely criticizing a product line
![Page 26: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
GROUP or CRIMINAL LIBELBeauharnais v. Illinois (1952)
![Page 27: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
LIBEL'S DEFENSES AND DAMAGES
o Truth
o Privilege
(Absolute and Qualified)
o Tarnished Reputation
o Opinion (Fair Comment & Criticism)
o Other (Consent, Right of Reply)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 28: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
LIBEL'S DEFENSES AND DAMAGES
o Privilege
(Absolute and Qualified) Official government records or proceedings,
so long as accuracy, balance, reasonable completeness are evident.
• Criminal charges
• Courtroom proceedings
• Legislature, school board, parish, other public meetings.
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 29: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
LIBEL'S DEFENSES AND DAMAGES
o Fair Comment & Criticism: Milkovich v. Lorain Journal (1990)
• Columnist claimed a coach was lying about a brawl, which court held to be a fact-based statement.
• Fair comments described as hyperbole, figures of speech, or statements incapable of being proven true or false, ugly.
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 30: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
LIBEL'S DEFENSES AND DAMAGES
opinion statements will lose legal protection once they suggest that
A. some defamatory but undisclosed facts do exist;
B. opinions are based on false or incomplete facts, or….
C. opinions are based on erroneous assessments of accurate information.
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 31: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Types of Damage Awards
![Page 32: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
DAMAGES: Compensatory• ACTUAL: monetary relief for
intangibles -- harm to reputation, mental anquish, other types of distress.
• SPECIAL: compensation for specific financial losses.
• PRESUMED: requires proof of actual malice in most cases
• NOMINAL: plaintiff wins case but jury finds no evidence indicating true harm suffered.
• DAMAGES: Punitive• PUNITIVE: Designed to punish the libeler
rather than compensate the person libeled.
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 33: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Compensatory Damages
Designed to make the plaintiff “whole” Presumed = no real proof of harm
needed; harm is in the words themselves
Actual = plaintiff must make some showing of harm
Special = plaintiff must prove very specific loss [e.g., firing from a job]
![Page 34: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Punitive Damages:
To punish and deter
![Page 35: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
Key Question of Libel
Burden of Proof
-- Falsity or Truth (Substantial)?
-- Common law required defendant prove truth.
-- Contemporary law requires plaintiff prove falsity.
![Page 36: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
FAULT
U. S. libel law used to embrace “strict liability” no finding of negligence
required if a damaged reputation
resulted from a publication, there was liability.
New York Times v. Sullivan changed that principle.
![Page 37: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
Key Question of Libel:
Was the defendant at fault?
-- Negligence defined as failure to exercise reasonable or ordinary care.
-- News media requirement of fact checking (verification); fair and balanced; seeking harmed party’s response, etc.
-- Evidence of ordinary malice.
![Page 38: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
New Standard of Fault:
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
Public Official’s
“Actual Malice” Test:
To show the Defendant had either
** Knowledge of Falsity, or
** Reckless Disregard of Truth or Falsity
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 39: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
PUBLIC OFFICIAL RATIONALE:
• Public officials voluntarily enter public life and realize
criticism may result.
• Public officials have more access to media to correct wrongs and make statements of rebuttal.
![Page 40: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Public versus Private Persons
o All-Purpose Public or Private Figures: Curtis Pub. Co. v. Butts (1967)
o Limited-Purpose Public Figures (Paul “Bear” Bryant)
o Rosenbloom case: Actual Malice if issue was of public importance
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 41: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Public versus Private Persons
Gertz v. Welch (1974)
Principle: “A publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehoods about an individual who is neither a public official nor a public figure may not claim the New York Times protection against liability…”
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006
![Page 42: CMCN 345 Communication Law and Ethics William R. Davie, Ph.D Lecture 5 Sept. 5, 2006](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062500/5681526b550346895dc09ee4/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Two Louisiana Cases
Actual Malice Test 1: Garrison v. State of Louisiana (1964)
o “high degree of awareness of probable falsity”
Actual Malice Test 2: St. Amant v. Thompson (1968)
o “entertained serious doubts as to the truth” of the publication
CMCN 345 Lecture 5, Sept. 5, 2006