Defamation Law and Press Freedom

This assignment delves into the nuances of defamation law and its intersection with press freedom. It examines the implications of libel lawsuits on public discourse and the balance between privacy rights and freedom of expression. The analysis is informed by various legal perspectives, including UK and US law, and explores the challenges faced by journalists and lawmakers in navigating these complexities.

Running head: MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Libel: Rights and Defence
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Table of Contents
Potential libel risks:....................................................................................................................2
Who could sue?......................................................................................................................3
Defence:..................................................................................................................................3
How to reduce the libel risk while still writing an enticing story:.........................................4
Breach of privacy:......................................................................................................................4
Commenced legal proceedings:.................................................................................................5
News Report...............................................................................................................................6
Reference:..................................................................................................................................8

2MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Potential libel risks:
Newspapers are considered to be an important part of our daily life. It provides
valuable information regarding politics, economy, entertainment, sports and commercial
matters. However, there are certain legal responsibilities present in case of any publication in
newspaper portal. It is important to point out the potential red flags with an intention to
clarify the legal risks related to the publication. The defamatory responsibilities regarding the
media publisher are named as Libel from the legal term (Barendt 2017). One of the most
obvious risks regarding publication is defamation and false light. Claim for defamation will
be placed if the publication poses a threat to the reputation of the claimant. However, in this
case, the statement must be based on unreal fact and the matter should be based on the private
life of the person. A true fact could not come under the purview of defamation. The law that
governs the defamatory statement published in newspaper in United Kingdom is Defamation
Act 2013 (Townend 2017). Further, the private information of any person published in
newspaper will be treated as a breach of section 230 of Communications Decency Act.
Another potential libel risk is that if any private information has been stated in the newspaper
without the consent of the person and with an intention to gain profit, it will be treated as the
breach of right of publicity. If the newspaper authority has used the name of a person without
obtaining permission from him or her, the publisher has to face the liability for
misappropriation (Watson, Roldan and Faza 2017). The information published by Sunday
Watchdog shall be held liable under Article 10 of the European Conventions on Human
Right. According to the Article, the newspaper could not take the plea under Freedom of
Speech if the statement has violated the reputation of any person. The same principle has
been codified under Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and

3MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Political Rights. Further, the claimant can ask for compensation from the newspaper authority
for invasion of privacy (Stephenson 2016).
Who could sue?
There are two types of suit can be filed against defamatory statement in the
newspaper such as civil proceeding and criminal proceeding. The person against whom the
defamatory statement has been published can be sued the newspaper (Hall‐Lipsy and
Malanga 2017). In addition, if the person against whom the statement has been published is a
public figure, the Government of the state could take proper legal action against the publisher
of the newspaper. Therefore, considering the facts of the given case study, it can be stated
that the Minister can file a suit against the newspaper under the claim for invasion of privacy.
He can only file the case under the defamation ground if he can prove that the statement
made in the newspaper is false (Jordan 2016). Further, as he is a public face and one of the
imminent members of the Parliament, the government can sue the newspaper authority for
breaching the privacy acts.
Defence:
According to the Defamation Act 2003, number of defences can be taken in case of
libel. The burden of proving the defamatory facts are laid on the claimant and he has to prove
that the publication made by the newspaper is false. Otherwise, the newspaper will not be
liable under the acts of defamation. Further, if the opinion published in the newspaper has
been regarded as a statement of opinion and if the publisher can prove that the statements are
important for public interest, it can be a good defence ground (Lodder and Murray 2015). The
minister is a public figure and any illicit relationship will be posed a great threat for the
public interest. The current newspaper is also advised to take a defence by proving the factual
truth of the published statement. The newspaper will be held liable under defamation if the
Minister can prove that the statements are false. Further, if the statement published in

4MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
newspaper will come under the lights of absolute privilege, no malicious prosecution could
be taken against it (Jones and Lidsky 2016). Apart from all the defences, there are certain
other defences too. If the newspaper authority could prove that the alleged statements are an
expression of opinion and not a mere statement of fact, claim for defamation cannot be made
against them. In New York Times Co. v Sullivan 376 U.S. 254 (1964), it has been held that if
the statement has been made against any public figure, the statement should be recklessly
disregarding the truth. This process is known as actual malice. If the malice could not be
proved, it will be considered as a defence to the newspaper.
How to reduce the libel risk while still writing an enticing story:
Certain steps should be followed to reduce the libel risks which are stated as under:
a) Sufficient awareness is required to be taken at the time of publishing a statement;
b) The statement which can be proved by the newspaper should be published;
c) In case of any unknown matters, allegations should not be made;
d) The newspaper authority should be cautious in case of publishing untrue facts;
e) The story writer should have to take the advantage of privilege defence;
f) The acts of the newspaper authority should be based on ethical ground.
Breach of privacy:
If the facts stated in a newspaper is infringed the privacy of any person, the
statement will be considered as a direct breach to the privacy. The rules of defamation will
not be applicable in this case. Therefore, even if the published article is true, the act will be
come under the purview of breach of privacy. The information stated in the newspaper will
be treated as a violation to the rights of publicity if the statement has been made without the
permission of the person (Hanna, Dodd and Morrison 2016). The term private facts denote
information about personal life. The personal matter includes the sexual activities or medical

5MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
condition of a person (Rolph 2016). In this case, it has been observed that the alleged
newspaper has published about the sexual affairs of the minister. Therefore, it can be stated
that the newspaper has breached privacy principle in this case. Further, if the person is a
public figure, any statement published in the newspaper regarding his private life will be
treated as breach of actual privacy. However, the newspaper authorities will be restricted
from taking the plea of freedom of speech in case of breach of privacy.
Commenced legal proceedings:
In UK, there are certain rules regarding the activeness of any proceedings. In case
of criminal act, the process is stated to be activated when the alleged person has been
arrested. On the other hand, in case of civil acts, the case becomes active after the date of trial
has been fixed by the proper court of justice (Scott 2016). The general interpretation of the
term “commencement of legal proceeding” means the process of legal standing over a matter
has been initiated. In case of civil lawsuit, the case has been started immediately after the
case has been filed by plaintiff before court of justice. On the other hand, the main purpose of
the commencement of proceeding is to enforce legal provision in the matter. However, in this
case, it has not been mentioned that the case against the newspaper has been fixed for trial or
not; but it has been stated that the Minister has already commenced the proceeding against
the newspaper authority (Hall‐Lipsy and Malanga 2017). Therefore, it can be stated that the
case filed by the Minister is active.
There are two types of contempt of court can be possible in this case; the first one
is statutory contempt and the other is common law contempt. According to Contempt of
Court Act 1981, if the publication of any matter creates substantial risk to others and if
serious injustice caused by such publication, the said act will be come under the purview

6MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
statutory contempt of court (File 2017). It has been observed in this case that the matter of the
publications have certain potentiality to create statutory contempt of court.

7MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
News Report
Minister resigned after allegation of having extra-marital affair with Italian film star
Staff reporter
Monday Feb 26, 2018
England- The Minister of State for Arts has resigned from his post after a newspaper
publication made in the Sunday Watchdog about his illicit affairs with an Italian film star.
The topic was became a hot cake in the state as the minister was hold an important position in
the Parliament. However, the matter was criticised by many politicians and it has been
observed that different expressions have been made from the different stages of the society.
The minister named Ernest Riskitt has resigned from his post with a justification in the press
association. He has mentioned that he has commenced legal proceedings against the
newspaper and will take proper action for revealing private life stories in the newspaper
without his consent. The publication has created an adverse situation as against Alicia Beddi
and she is forced to change her residence after such publication.
On the other hand, the other members of the Parliament have supported the views
of the alleged minister and criticised the statement made by the newspaper. Jas Patel, the
correspondent of Blanktown has raised his voice against the newspaper publication.
Additionally, Mrs Lorna Backup, the regional chairperson of the party has expressed her
anger by stating the article as a defamatory statement. She has mentioned that the article was
“scurrilous in nature”.
Another Member of Parliament, Mr Dennis Scanner has asked the Prime Minister
about the rights of the newspaper authority regarding the private life of ministers. He has
asserted the fact whether any legal proceeding can be taken against such invasion of privacy

8MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
or not. he has further requested the Prime Minister to take sufficient legal action against the
usage of bugging devices and long-lens camera for interfering in the personal life of the
Parliament members.

9MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Reference:
Barendt, E., 2017. Defamation Law.
File, P., 2017. Retract, Expand: Libel Law, the Professionalization of Journalism, and the Limits of
Press Freedom at the Turn of the Twentieth Century. Communication Law and Policy, 22(3), pp.275-
308.
Hall‐Lipsy, E. and Malanga, S., 2017. Defamation lawsuits: academic sword or
shield?. EMBO molecular medicine, p.e201708489.
Hall‐Lipsy, E. and Malanga, S., 2017. Defamation lawsuits: academic sword or shield?. EMBO
molecular medicine, p.e201708489.
Hanna, M., Dodd, M. and Morrison, J., 2016. McNae's Essential Law for Journalists and
Essential Public Affairs for Journalists Pack. Oxford University Press.
Johnson, V.R., 2016. Comparative Defamation Law: England and the United States. U. Miami Int'l &
Comp. L. Rev., 24, p.1.
Jones, R.A. and Lidsky, L.B., 2016. Of Reasonable Readers and Unreasonable Speakers:
Libel Law in a Networked World.
Jordan, R., 2016. The Appropriate Balance between Privacy and Freedom of Expression
under UK Law: Just Where Does It Lie When Considering the Actions of the Press. QMLJ, 7,
p.16.
Lodder, A.R. and Murray, A.D., 2015. A primer on the law of internet communication and
content: from the UK and Dutch perspective.
Rolph, D., 2016. Reputation, celebrity and defamation law. Routledge.

10MEDIA LAW AND REGULATION
Scott, A., 2016. An unwholesome layer cake: intermediary liability in English defamation
and data protection law. Comparative Defamation and Privacy Law.
Sharland, M., Butler, K., Cant, A., Dagan, R., Davies, G., de Groot, R., Elliman, D., Esposito,
S., Finn, A., Galanakis, M. and Giaquinto, C. eds., 2016. Manual of childhood infections: the
blue book. Oxford University Press.
Stephenson, R., 2016. A crisis of democratic accountability: public libel law and the
checking function of the press(Doctoral dissertation, University of Oxford).
Townend, J., 2017. Data protection and the ‘right to be forgotten’in practice: a UK
perspective. International Journal of Legal Information, 45(1), pp.28-33.
Watson, R., Roldan, R. and Faza, A., 2017. Toward Normalization of Defamation Law: The
UK Defamation Act of 2013 and the US SPEECH Act of 2010 as Responses to the Issue of
Libel Tourism. Communication Law and Policy, 22(1), pp.1-63.