Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

The law of defamation targets false communication, whether by words, pictures, gestures, or music, that causes one's reputation to be harmed among a respectable segment of society. The law, especially in Euro-American nations, traditionally distinguished between libel (written) and slander (spoken). Recovery for slander generally required proof of special damages, or monetary loss, because the mere spoken word was thought to carry less potential for harm than the written word. In many jurisdictions, including the United States, the distinction between libel and slander has been blurred and no longer holds great importance. In jurisdictions that maintain the distinction between libel and slander, however, an important and unresolved question is whether defamatory →  Internet communications constitute libel or slander. The law of defamation in a society reflects, to a great extent, assumptions about the relative value of reputation versus freedom of expression (→  Freedom of Communication ). For example, the US Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan takes a constitutional “actual malice” approach to protecting unknowing false and defamatory statements about public officials and public figures. Few nations follow the uniquely media-friendly approach of American libel law, but contemporary defamation laws around the world tend to protect freedom of expression more so than ... log in or subscribe to read full text