Need Help Asap). How journalists avoid libelous situations. [ Start Reading The beginning of the story in the picture first Then
continue reading from here] -----> Previously, libel litigants only had to demonstrate that the article in question was, in fact, libelous and that it had been published. Requiring public officials to prove that journalists had knowingly published something libelous made it much more difficult to win such cases. "Changes In The Law" Since the Times vs. Sullivan ruling, the law has been effectively expand to cover not just public officials, i.e. people working in government, but also public figures. These people can be anyone from rock stars to the CEOs of major corporations. In short, Times vs. Sullivan made it more difficult to win libel lawsuits and effectively expanded the power of the press to investigate and write critically about those who hold positions of power and influence. Of course, that doesn't mean reporters can't still be sued for libel. What it does mean is that reporters must do meticulous reporting when they write stories that include negative information about individuals or institutions. So for instance, if you write a story claiming that the mayor of your town is illegally skimming money from the town treasury, you must have the facts to back that up. Remember, libel is by definition a falsehood. In other words, if something is demonstrably true, it's not libelous. "Truth, Privilege, And Fair Comment And Criticism " Reporters should also understand the three common defenses against a libel lawsuit: Truth- Since libel is by definition false, if a journalist reports something that is true, it cannot be libelous, even if it damages a person's reputation. The truth is the reporter's best defense against a libel suit. The key is in doing solid reporting so that the story can be proven true. "Privilege- Accurate reports about official proceedings-anything from a trial to a city council meeting or a congressional hearing - cannot be libelous. This may seem like an odd defense, but imagine covering a murder trial without it. Conceivably, the reporter covering that trial could be sued for libel every time he or she reported someone in the courtroom had accused the defendant of murder. However, states have different laws about journalist privilege. Also, privilege might not protect a reporter if he or she reported an official's statement that the reporter should have know was false. " Fair Comment & Criticism - This defense covers expressions of opinion, everything from movie reviews to columns on the op-ed page. The fair comment and criticism defense allows reporters to express opinions no matter how scathing or critical. One example could be a music critic ripping into the latest Beyonce CD. Another would be a political columnist writing that she believes the president is doing a horrible job. As expression of opinion, neither of these provide grounds for a libel lawsuit in the United States legal system. ( Question 1: Write a short paragraph that explains the central idea of the article. Use at least two details from the article to support your response). Will Mark Brainliest . 
1 answer:
You might be interested in