The Fact Checker's Bible by Sarah Harrison Smith

Author:Sarah Harrison Smith
Language: eng
Format: mobi, epub
Tags: Fiction
ISBN: 9780307428547
Publisher: Random House Inc.
Published: 2007-12-18T04:30:00+00:00

6

Libel

Good checkers believe that all facts should be treated as if they were equally important. The publication of defamatory facts or visual images can give rise to a libel suit, however. If the facts are found to be incorrect and published with a degree of negligence or “actual malice” that meets the adjudicating state’s requirements for libel of that particular plaintiff, damages can ensue. Some facts, then, need especially attentive checking.

The costs of fighting a libel suit are significant. George Freeman, assistant general counsel for The New York Times, says when publishers lose, awards for damages often exceed a million dollars. “Punitive damages get reversed and lowered on appeal, but they can end up in the many millions. About two-thirds to three-quarters of libel cases are lost by the media at trial. The same percentage are reversed on appeal. But by that time—five years or more, probably—the legal fees alone will run into the millions.” When the Philip Morris Corporation sued the ABC television network for libel over a 1994 ABC report alleging that nicotine was intentionally added to cigarettes, ABC, which was by no means clearly in the wrong, decided to settle the case before going to court. They issued an apology for one statement and agreed to pay legal fees, which had already amounted to $15 million.

Carol Burnett’s 1976 libel suit against The National Enquirer did go to court, even after the Enquirer published a retraction. Although Burnett’s initial $1.6 million award (which was lowered on appeal) was far smaller than Philip Morris’s legal fees, it was a substantial victory for a public figure. The Enquirer had implied that Burnett had drunk too much at a French restaurant in Washington, D.C., and had “become boisterous,” eventually arguing with Henry Kissinger and “disturbing other guests.” The Enquirer simply didn’t have the facts to back up its story. According to Alex Beam of The Atlantic Monthly, “The case had a plethora of bad facts. In a deposition a Florida-based editor of the Enquirer said that he distrusted the source of the original report and had rewritten the report himself. A reporter testified that he had tried to fact check the item one hour before deadline and failed. Two of the restaurant’s employees came forward and said they had told Enquirer reporters that Burnett hadn’t been drunk at all.” Under scrutiny, it was clear that the Enquirer editors had reason to believe that the story was flawed and decided to publish anyway.

Preventing a libel suit in the first place with thorough fact-checking is clearly the more cost-efficient option. Fortunately, good checking can do a lot to protect a publication from liability under libel law. Not only is truth always a defense against libel, but the very process of fact-checking, even when it fails to eliminate inaccuracy, can be a safeguard against liability.

Defining Libel

This discussion of libel will focus on its implications for fact-checking and will pass over aspects of the law that are less relevant to it. It is not intended to be a comprehensive guide to libel law, which varies in its particulars from state to state.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.