Libel

I

Introduction

Libel, in law, a communication (whether by word or picture) about a living person or an organization, made to at least one person other than its subject, which damages the subject's reputation. Technically, a written defamation is libel and a spoken one is slander. In the past, some libelous communications were punished even if true. Today, however, only false statements can be termed libel.

American libel law originally was based on Anglo-Saxon common law tradition. Common law privileges were developed slowly over centuries. They now coexist to an uncertain extent with rapidly expanding constitutional privileges.

II

Constitutional Limitations

Until 1964 libel was considered to be outside the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of free expression. Then, in a land-mark decision, the Supreme Court ruled that certain false and libelous communications, if inadvertently made, are protected by the 1st Amendment. As a result, public officials or other public figures can now pursue libel claims only for communications made with knowledge of, or in reckless disregard of, their falsity; that is, made with “constitutional malice”. Libel about private individuals, who are considered less able to respond to damaging communications, cannot legally be punished unless, at minimum, it is negligently made. It is now also recognized that ideas and opinions, whether true or false, cannot constitutionally be subject to libel claims. The full effects of the constitutional revolution begun by the Supreme Court have yet to be determined.

III

Civil Actions

Libel claims in the U.S. are almost always pursued as civil actions for money damages. Civil libel claims can be asserted by either individuals or organizations such as associations and corporations. The targets of claims are often the mass media, usually publishers, broadcasters, or journalists. Claims against private individuals, corporations, and other groups are also frequently pursued. Libel suits against nonmedia defendants can arise, for example, from business dealings or even private communications among friends and associates.

---

---

Constitutional protections limit civil libel claims against the media, but the scope of their application to nonmedia cases remains unclear. Even if a communication is not protected by the 1st Amendment, however, and even if it is false and injurious to reputation, it may still be protected or privileged under common law. The common law deems communications involving matters of paramount public interest (as, for example, by participants in court or other official proceedings) “absolutely” privileged and thus normally immune from suit. “fair” reports by observers of official proceedings also are generally considered privileged. Other communications that are deemed to further a lesser public or common interest (such as reports of crime, business, or organizational activities) are considered subject only to a qualified privilege, which can be forfeited if abused. Abuse includes publication with common law “malice” (that is, ill will), or excessive publication beyond those who share the common interest.

IV

Damages

It has usually been presumed that libelous communications caused damage. In many cases today, however, actual injury must be proved before money damages may be awarded. If proved, damages are available for monetary losses—such as loss of business or of a job—as well as for other types of losses, including harm to the victim's reputation or emotional distress. In addition, punitive damages (aimed to punish the libeler rather than to compensate the victim) have also been awarded, but in many cases punitive damages are no longer permitted without proof of constitutional malice. Nominal damages, such as $1, may be awarded when a libelous communication causes little harm.

	More from Encarta
	•  Presidential Myths Quiz •  Coffee break: Recharge your brain