If you are interested in journalism, then you should know that you may be accused of defamation if you publish information that turns out to be false. Fortunately, there are defenses that you can use to escape liability. Here are three of the most common defenses that journalists use in defamation cases:
1. Fair Report Privilege
This is the defense to invoke if you relied on a public statement; either on an official document or made by a public official, while making your statement. For example, it may be that you accessed court records (those available to the public) and quoted from them. This defense is permitted to encourage public scrutiny of government activities.
For it to stick, you must prove that you portrayed the information accurately; any distortion may render your defense useless. Of course, you must also show your source – you can't just say that you were quoting a public source without referencing it; in short, it must be verifiable. Note that fair report privilege does not apply to statements made by public officials in their private capacities such as gossip.
Neutral Report Privilege
This defense is relevant if you have been accused of defamation after reporting on accusations made by one public figure about another public figure. It was instituted to encourage the press to report on matters of public interest. Consider an example where a senator accuses another of misappropriating public funds. If you publish the accusations and you are accused of defamation, then you can use the neutral report privilege as a defense.
Note that the public figure must not be a government agent. The designation also covers prominent organizations, scientists, and individuals. The main requirement is that the statement be newsworthy – a determination which is the prerogative of the involved court. Be warned that this form of defense isn't as widely recognized as the fair report privilege.
Wire Service Defense
This is what you rely on if the alleged defamatory statement is one that you republished from another source. For it to work, you must prove these conditions:
- You did not know that the statement was false
- You did not make extensive modifications to the statement
- Your source is a reputable news service.
As you may have guessed, the main issue of contention is what makes a publication a "reputable news source." The obvious national or regional publishers are covered, but the issue of smaller news sources (such as news-oriented blogs) is still up for debate. It is up to the judge to determine what constitutes a reputable news agency.
The applications of these defenses vary by state. It is best to verify your sources and laws before publishing questionable statements. If you have been already accused, however, then your best bet is to get a lawyer to analyze your situation and advise you on the best course of action or defense to invoke.
To learn more, contact a law office like Vaughan & Vaughan.
