Jane, a private individual, discovers that a local magazine published an article falsely claiming that she mismanaged funds in her small business. The statement is damaging to her reputation, and she sues the magazine for defamation. To defeat Jane's claim, which defense offers the magazine the strongest chance of avoiding liability under modern defamation doctrine?
The article was labeled as an opinion, automatically shielding it from liability.
The magazine exercised reasonable care in verifying the article's accuracy and therefore was not negligent.
The fair-report privilege protects the magazine because the article concerned a matter of public concern.
Jane became a public figure by operating her business, so she must prove actual malice.
For a private-figure plaintiff, the First Amendment permits liability only when the publisher acted with at least negligence. If the magazine can show that it exercised reasonable care-through fact-checking, verifying sources, and acting consistently with responsible journalistic practices-Jane cannot satisfy the fault element required by Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. Conversely, merely labeling a statement an "opinion" is not automatically protective after Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.; calling Jane a public figure would raise, not lower, the magazine's burden; and the fair-report privilege applies only to accurate reports of official proceedings, which is not this case.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does 'defamation' mean in a legal context?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is 'actual malice' in defamation cases?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the First Amendment protect opinions in defamation cases?