Libel, Ethics, Plagiarism
Paul McGrath
(Class Session 2)
Two types of defamation: Libel, slander
Libel is a false statement printed or broadcast about a
person that tends to bring that person into public
hatred, contempt or ridicule (defamation).
Slander refers to spoken words of limited reach (not
broadcast).
Defamation in and of itself is not illegal. Saying Joe Blow
is accused of a crime or that Craig Biggio “stunk”
yesterday after going 0-for-4 and making two errors is
defamatory. But neither Joe nor Craig has a legal foot to
stand on in court. Of course, anyone can sue. They just
may not win.
The 3 main elements of libel
(other than falsity)
 Defamation
 Identification
 Publication
DON’T BE A DIP
Defamation
Presenting someone in a bad light. In the 9th century, in some
enlightened venues, the penalty for defamation was the loss of one’s
tongue.
Identification
Doesn’t always have to be by name. Referring to students taking
COMM 3231 on Monday or Wednesday mornings at UHCL would be
considered identification.
Publication
New technology has broadened the definition of publication.
A fax is a publication, but a federal court ruled in 2003 that Web site
editors, bloggers and email editors can’t be held liable for libelous
statements.
Fault: a fifth element of LIBEL
For a libel suit to succeed, the defendant – YOU perhaps
– must be found to have some degree of fault. The
burden of proof on fault is entirely on the plaintiff.
Fault varies depending on the status of the plaintiff (who
must be a living person or persons):
For public officials and public figures – They have to prove
actual malice (also called reckless disregard for the truth)
For private citizens – They only have to prove some degree
of negligence.
So how do know if someone if a public official / figure?
Public official? Public figure?
 A public official is someone who has or appears to the
public to have substantial responsibility for the conduct of
government affairs. If they get paid by your tax dollars then
they are a public official (includes police, elected officials,
candidates etc.)
 A public figure is a person with pervasive power or
influence, or someone who thrusts themselves into the
vortex of a public controversy. Texas courts have ruled that
it makes no difference if they seek the spotlight or if the
spotlight finds them. But one judge says that defining just
who is a public figure “is like trying to nail a jellyfish to a
wall.” Who determines when a public figure’s 15 minutes of
fame is up?
 A private citizen need only prove that there was
negligence in the information gathering process. Doesn’t
have to show reckless disregard for the truth.
DEFENDING AGAINST LIBEL
What constitutes actual malice or negligence?
Here’s what it isn’t: Texas courts have decided that the
following is insufficient to be deemed actual malice:
 Failure to perform further investigation or further




interviews
Inconsistencies in internal policies, procedures etc.
Doing constant rewrites or omission of more favorable
interviews
Evidence that the reporter hates the subject
Reporter is under continuous legal review
DEFENDING AGAINST LIBEL
Where libel most commonly occurs:
1. Shoddy or incomplete reporting.
2. Crime stories -- by definition they contain defamatory
material.
3. Photos -- used incorrectly
4. Quotes -- Tale bearers are just as guilty as tale tellers.
Note that libel can be in ads also. One of the most famous
libel cases – Times vs. Sullivan – was sparked by the
content of an ad.
DEFENDING AGAINST LIBEL
You – OK, your lawyers -- might have to use the “Russian
river defense” strategy. Just as the Russians in WWII went
from river to river to defend against the Nazis, your legal
team might have to go from one libel defense to another
until you succeed. Your defense choices:





Truth
Privilege
Fair comment
Consent
Reply
12 ways to stay out of court
1. Treat every story that could damage someone’s
reputation like it’s fire.
2. Watch out for the so-called routine story
3. Be fair -- try to get the other side of the story.
4. Be very careful with quotes
5. If you make a mistake, but quick to run a correction.
Demands for a retraction should go to your lawyer. Have
a good corrections / retractions policy.
6. Take care with headlines and cutlines (captions)
12 ways to stay out of court
7. Be courteous to customers / readers who call or email.
8. Have libel insurance
9. Try to stay up to date on changes in libel and privacy laws
10. Notes – Keep them for at least a year; that’s the statute of
limitations on libel. Always tape police officials/officers on
sensitive stories -- they will nearly always lie later.
11. Using the word allegedly won’t save you -- look up
“allege” in the AP stylebook
12. Always use proper attribution
For more information, please check out the “libel and privacy” section of the AP stylebook
Everyday libel: Practical usage
The potential for libelous content to published exists every day. Crime
stories by definition are defamatory and should be handled with care.
Here are some examples from the “Libel and Such” handout that you
should familiarize yourself with:
 Murder: The charge implies premeditation and the term often
indicates legal closure (a conviction). Sans a conviction, it’s best to
use killing, slaying or shooting death etc.
 The “for” word: Implies guilt. Don’t write arrested for, charged for,
indicted for, going on trial for, etc. Convicted for and sentenced for
are OK – there’s a conviction.
 Attribution: It’s always best to attribute defamatory material, but be
careful: just adding police said isn’t always the solution.
Other legal issues
Check your textbook for a fuller discussion
of these issues:
 Invasion of privacy
• Intrusion
• False light
• Public disclosure of private facts
• Appropriation of name, photo or words
Other legal issues
Check your textbook for a fuller discussion of these issues:
 Shield laws (Texas doesn’t have one; neither do feds)
 Newsroom searches (see previous reference to notes)
 Copyright law
 Taste and decency (censorship)
 Open meetings, open records
WEB SITES
The Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press
(www.rcfp.org) has a very useful Web site that
provides a wealth of information on legal issues that
apply to journalists, including:
1. State by state compilation of libel laws
2. How to fight a gag order
3. Court access and access to public records
4. How to use the FOI Act
5. Guidelines for photographers
6. Shield laws
WEB SITES
Poynter online (www.poynter.org) is another good
source to help you stay apprised of legal issues.
Magazine resources

American Journalism Review

Columbia Journalism Review
Ethics and Plagiarism
Who love’s ya
baby? Not too
many it would
appear. After 9/11
(note the date of
the survey), no
wonder firefighters
are on top of the
list. At least
journalists are
rated higher than
lawyers. Imagine
being a journalist
AND a lawyer …
THE TRUST FACTOR
According to one poll, this is how Texans rank the
honesty and ethics of various professions:
Profession
Trust rating
Teacher
85%
Doctors
77%
Judges
71%
Police officers
66%
Journalists
48%
Lawyers
40%
Auto mechanics
39%
Politicians
26%
ETHICS AND PLAGIARISM
What not to do (or two not to emulate)
 Wade Roberts
 Geraldo Rivera
Who can you trust?
It’s no secret that perceptions of the news media are running at
all-time lows. Those perceptions may be hurdles or roadblocks for
you.
A recent survey for the Associated Press Managing Editors
Association indicates that 9 out of 10 Americans think reporters use
unethical or illegal means to obtain stories.
A report by the Pew Research Center, also cited in the textbook,
indicates that 69 percent of news professionals say the distinction
between reporting and commentary has seriously eroded and twothirds say attempts to boost readership or viewership have pushed
the industry too far in the direction of “infotainment.”
ETHICS GAP
Contributing factors to the ethics gap:
 The personal biases of the audience
(“Why are you picking on my guy?”)
 Lack of understanding of journalistic rules and goals
(“Why give both sides?”)
 Rise of “infotainment” has clouded news and soured public
perceptions of the news media
(“Will Anna Nicole / Paris / Britney / Lindsay please go
away now?”)
 Ivory tower attitudes by journalists.
(“Our way of looking at things must be the right way.”)
 Lack of news councils. No oversight body for journalists except in
Minnesota and Washington state
 Sloppiness. Not doing your job. Realize that people will lie to you or
spin the facts.
CREDIBILITY: A major “C” word
Ethics and a strong sense of values form the cornerstone of
credibility.
Without credibility, few journalistic goals can be achieved.
The true power of the media (including advertising and PR)
lies in the ability to influence society through truth-telling.
If the public can’t trust our product (information) we won’t
be very successful.
In journalism, taking shortcuts is the path to danger.
Guiding principles
1. Seek the truth and report it as fully as possible (afflict
the comfortable and comfort the afflicted; give voice to
the voiceless and hold the powerful accountable)
2. Act independently
3. Minimize harm (to yourself, the medium your represent
and to those directly and indirectly affected by the
story)
Ethical decision-making
Many stories will require you to make a variety of commonplace ethical
decisions: the use of juvenile names, the use of a rape victim’s name,
use of unnamed sources, whether to trust data in a report or survey,
use of graphic photos. You need to create an ethical decision-making
toolbox that is open-minded, fair and consistent.
Creating choices. How ethical decisions are made (handout):
 Gut reaction -- Listen to your gut but don’t always trust it
 Rule obedience -- After years of cajoling, the Chronicle finally has a
written ethics policy. Having rules helps with consistency, but
beware of painting yourself into a corner with rules
 Reflection and reasoning -- Widens the circle of discussion in
order to create alternatives and options. Be careful about allowing
one individual to provide a universal opinion. For instance, there is
no universal black opinion or universal women’s opinion about most
issues.
Ethical decision-making: The process
You have to do front-end thinking
 Take note of what newsroom rules apply.
 Invite collaboration. Collaboration thrives in an environment where
input is not only allowed, but valued equally.
 Consider the consequences of any course of action OR inaction.
What will the possible results or counteractions be?
 Determine who the stakeholders are. Who will be most affected by
your decision? The stakeholders could include the journalist, the
subject, relatives / friends of the subject or the news organization
itself.
 Decide what principles, both as a human and as a journalist, need to
be applied.
 Try to reach a consensus or present alternatives that allow you to
accomplish your journalistic goals while minimizing harm.
 See the list of questions on Page 4 of the handout.
Seven deadly ethical sins







Deception: misrepresenting yourself to get information
Conflict of interest: accepting gifts from sources
Bias: slanting a story by commission or omission
Fabrication: manufacturing quotes or sources
Theft: taking info without permission (United Foods)
Burning a source: betraying a confidence
Plagiarism: passing off someone else’s work as your
own
Online ethics
Handout – Do the same rules apply?
The first paragraph of the handout asks some very
interesting questions. The Web offers a degree of
immediacy to the print journalist – but does accuracy often
suffer? Or does online journalism need a different set of
standards from MSM? What kind of standards do we apply
to the growing wave of “citizen journalist”? Should you
explain your standards in a “public” place?
Note the sections on blogging and e-mail interviews. We
will be talking more about these subjects in subsequent
weeks; the latter first. Is an e-mail interview more
trustworthy than a face-to-face interview? Do you need to
label such an interview as being done by e-mail?
PLAGIARISM
Presenting someone else’s words or thoughts without
attributing the source is plagiarism. Taking someone else’s
work (someone else’s sweat equity) and making it your own is
also plagiarism.
It’s intellectual theft and perhaps the biggest sin in the
communications profession because it is nearly always
committed with intent.
It’s also a sign of laziness, not a good trait to have.
Permission is no excuse; we pay millions of dollars to use AP
stories but that doesn’t mean I can change a few words and
slap my byline on an AP story.
PLAGIARISM
How to avoid plagiarism
1. When directly quoting, paraphrasing or summarizing
the words of sources or source material, always
attribute the source. When the information comes from
a person, it’s good to indicate how it was obtained: face
to face, phone, email etc. Helps reader weigh veracity.
2. Careful note-taking -- indicate direct quotes, time and
place of interview. Paraphrasing is often more useful
3. Give yourself time -- Saying “I was up against deadline”
won’t save your job.
PLAGIARISM: When credit is unnecessary
Note the gray area regarding items of “common
knowledge.” Something is probably common knowledge,
and thus no reference is needed, if:
1. It is documented in five other sources
(the Astros score given in 5 mediums)
2. Is information readers should already know
(who the president is)
3. Is information readily found in a general reference work
(who the secretary of Labor is).
Plagiarism: A checklist
 Does this wording sound familiar?
 Do I know where it came from?
 Have I arranged my notes so attributed material remains
separate from my own material?
 Can I document the source of my information,
description, or observation?
 Have I asked my editor to alert me to anything she, or
he, thinks reads like something else she, or he, has
read?
 Am I giving credit, or some indication, as to where this
material came from when appropriate?
 Have I double-checked the source of work?
Source: “Great Journalists Credit Others" Poynter Online
handout
Questions?
Extra credit assignment
Worth 10 points on a story grade or 5 points on either AP
on the news quiz grade. You can work in a group if you
wish.
The “Local Statesman”:
 Read over the information in the handout. Write a
paragraph to a page on what you or your staff should do.
 Are there any libel concerns? Why or why not?
 What are your ethical concerns? What does your gut
say? What newsroom rules apply? How can you give
yourself journalistic choices?
Also for next class
 Prepare for your next current events quiz
 Read the assigned chapters
 Review some obits or paid mortuary
items
 AP exercise 1 will be due.
 Think about who you want to interview