Skip to main content

Defamation Blog Post 2

While reading about defamation in chapter 4, I was interested to learn the difference between a “Private person” and a “public person’. I wasn’t aware that there was a distinction between the two according to the supreme court. According to the chapter in the case New York Times v. Sullivan the supreme court ruled in favor of the New York Times stating “The Court’s philosophy concerning verbal attacks- even in some instances, defamatory falsehoods- directed towards certain public persons is a different matter” (78, Tedford). I have been curious how tabloids were able to publish outlandish headlines that proved untrue. I often see US weekly or the National Enquirer post things of that nature so it was interesting to me that the reason they were able to do this is because they are posting about a public person. I’ve also noticed sources do this to candidates during elections with no consequences. The court said “in the interest of “robust” and “wide open” debate on public matters, people in government should accept the fact that “vehement and caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks are to be expected” (78, Tedford). Now that I know that the supreme court ruled on the difference between private and public figures I understand why news sources are allowed to post things that might be considered defamation to a private person such as myself.

After I learned the difference between public and private people I was curious if there were cases that public figures successfully sued for defamation. I assumed there would be but I was curious what they would be since its harder for them to bring forth these cases. I came across this article titled 6 most successful celebrity Libel and Slander cases. It was interesting to see what celebrities were awarded money and what their cases were. Overall, I thought the supreme court ruling made sense because public figures subject themselves to less privacy based on their profession. What do you guys think about the supreme court’s ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan?

Citation
Ciccatelli, Amanda. “6 most successful celebrity libel and slander cases.” InsideCounsel, 18 Nov.
            2014, www.insidecounsel.com/2014/11/18/6-most-successful-celebrity-libel-and-

            slander-case?slreturn=1506384755&page=6. Accessed 25 Sept. 2017.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gamifying Citizenship

The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways. From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supp...
1 comment
Read more

Wedding Cake Court Case (make-up post)

Wedding cake court case involving a gay couple, Charlie Craig & David Mullins, and a cake baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for the couple. Just all around, it's a tricky debate with many different angles due to the baker arguing on the grounds of the First Amendment---its protections for free speech and the free exercise of religion. In the end, I think it comes down to whether we consider baking a cake qualifies an exercise of freedom of expression. I would say that it depends on the situation/context of baking. If Mr. Phillips wants his cake baking to be categorized artistic expression that falls under free expression, he can just go bake a cake on his own. Only then when he's on his own private time does it qualify, but as soon as he offered his skills as a public service via his business, I'd argue he gave that right to expression up. Also, what's stopping other artisans/professional services to deny services? By Mr. Phillip's logic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy

While reading Chapter 15, I got the sense that the book was really coming full circle. In the first week of class, we established a meaning for freedom of speech and that shared meaning allowed us to navigate the classroom together as a classroom and a collective group. Creating a space that also involved mutual respect of opinons but encouraging difference in them as well. This brings me to an article I found about the importance of Freedom of Speech in a democracy. It is a basic human right to be able to express opinions and beliefs in our country. Although that is the main component, just like we established in class the first few weeks, in a government and democracy, Freedom of Speech also consists of the ability to listen to people with difference in opinions. In the article , editor Rachael  Jolly says, “ We are going through a time where people don’t want to be on a panel with people they disagree with. But we should feel comfortable being in a room with people who disagree ...
4 comments
Read more