gertz robert welch argued november decided june chicago policeman named nuccio convicted murder victim family retained petitioner reputable attorney represent civil litigation nuccio article appearing respondent magazine alleged nuccio murder trial part communist conspiracy discredit local police falsely stated petitioner arranged nuccio implied petitioner criminal record labeled petitioner brought diversity libel action respondent jury returned verdict petitioner district decided standard enunciated new york times sullivan bars media liability defamation public official absent proof defamatory statements published knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth apply suit concluded standard protects media discussion public issue without regard whether person defamed public official new york times sullivan supra public figure curtis publishing butts found petitioner failed prove knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth therefore entered judgment respondent appeals affirmed held publisher broadcaster defamatory falsehoods individual neither public official public figure may claim new york times protection liability defamation ground defamatory statements concern issue public general interest pp private individuals characteristically less effective opportunities rebuttal public officials public figures vulnerable injury defamation voluntarily exposed increased risk injury defamatory falsehoods also deserving recovery state interest compensating injury reputation private individuals therefore greater public officials public figures pp extend new york times standard media defamation private persons whenever issue general public interest involved abridge unacceptable degree legitimate state interest compensating private individuals injury reputation occasion additional difficulty forcing courts decide ad hoc basis publications broadcasts address issues general public interest pp long impose liability without fault may define appropriate standard liability publisher broadcaster defamatory falsehood injures private individual whose substance makes substantial danger reputation apparent pp however may permit recovery presumed punitive damages liability based knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth private defamation plaintiff establishes liability less demanding standard new york times test may recover compensation actual injury pp petitioner neither public official public figure pp neither petitioner past service certain city committees appearance attorney coroner inquest death murder victim made public official petitioner also public figure absent clear evidence general fame notoriety community pervasive involvement ordering affairs society individual deemed public figure aspects life rather question determined reference individual participation particular controversy giving rise defamation petitioner role nuccio affair make public figure pp powell delivered opinion stewart marshall blackmun rehnquist joined blackmun filed concurring opinion post burger post douglas post brennan post white post filed dissenting opinions wayne giampietro argued cause filed briefs petitioner clyde watts argued cause filed brief respondent justice powell delivered opinion struggled nearly decade define proper accommodation law defamation freedoms speech press protected first amendment decision return effort granted certiorari reconsider extent publisher constitutional privilege liability defamation private citizen chicago policeman named nuccio shot killed youth named nelson state authorities prosecuted nuccio homicide ultimately obtained conviction murder second degree nelson family retained petitioner elmer gertz reputable attorney represent civil litigation nuccio respondent publishes american opinion monthly outlet views john birch society early magazine began warn nationwide conspiracy discredit local law enforcement agencies create stead national police force capable supporting communist dictatorship part continuing effort alert public assumed danger managing editor american opinion commissioned article murder trial officer nuccio purpose engaged regular contributor magazine march respondent published resulting article title richard nuccio war police article purports demonstrate testimony nuccio criminal trial false prosecution part communist campaign police capacity counsel nelson family civil litigation petitioner attended coroner inquest boy death initiated actions damages neither discussed officer nuccio press played part criminal proceeding notwithstanding petitioner remote connection prosecution nuccio respondent magazine portrayed architect according article police file petitioner took big irish cop lift article stated petitioner official marxist league industrial democracy originally known intercollegiate socialist society advocated violent seizure government labeled gertz leninist also stated gertz officer national lawyers guild described communist organization probably outfit plan communist attack chicago police democratic convention statements contained serious inaccuracies implication petitioner criminal record false petitioner member officer national lawyers guild years earlier evidence organization taken part planning demonstrations chicago also basis charge petitioner leninist never member marxist league industrial democracy intercollegiate socialist society managing editor american opinion made effort verify substantiate charges petitioner instead appended editorial introduction stating author conducted extensive research richard nuccio case included article photograph petitioner wrote caption appeared elmer gertz red guild harrasses nuccio respondent placed issue american opinion containing article sale newsstands throughout country distributed reprints article streets chicago petitioner filed diversity action libel district northern district illinois claimed falsehoods published respondent injured reputation lawyer citizen filing answer respondent moved dismiss complaint failure state claim upon relief granted apparently ground petitioner failed allege special damages ruled statements contained article constituted libel per se illinois law consequently petitioner need plead special damages supp answering complaint respondent filed pretrial motion summary judgment claiming constitutional privilege liability defamation asserted petitioner public official public figure article concerned issue public interest concern reasons respondent argued entitled invoke privilege enunciated new york times sullivan rule respondent escape liability unless petitioner prove publication defamatory falsehood actual malice knowledge false reckless disregard whether false respondent claimed petitioner make showing submitted supporting affidavit magazine managing editor editor denied knowledge falsity statements concerning petitioner stated relied author reputation prior experience accuracy authenticity author contributions american opinion district denied respondent motion summary judgment memorandum opinion september dispute respondent claim protection new york times standard rather concluded petitioner might overcome constitutional privilege making factual showing sufficient prove publication defamatory falsehood reckless disregard truth course trial however became clear trial accepted respondent asserted grounds applying new york times rule case thought respondent claim protection constitutional privilege depended contention petitioner either public official new york times decision public figure curtis publishing butts apparently discounting argument privilege arise presence public issue evidence presented submission case jury ruled effect petitioner neither public official public figure added resulting application new york times standard require directed verdict respondent statements article constituted libel per se illinois law submitted case jury instructions withdrew consideration issues save measure damages jury awarded petitioner following jury verdict reflection district concluded new york times standard govern case even though petitioner public official public figure accepted respondent contention privilege protected discussion public issue without regard status person defamed therein accordingly entered judgment respondent notwithstanding jury verdict conclusion anticipated reasoning plurality rosenbloom metromedia petitioner appealed contest applicability new york times standard case although appeals seventh circuit doubted correctness district determination petitioner public figure overturn finding agreed district respondent assert constitutional privilege article concerned matter public interest citing intervening decision rosenbloom metromedia supra appeals read rosenbloom require application new york times standard publication broadcast issue significant public interest without regard position fame anonymity person defamed concluded respondent statements concerned issue reviewing record appeals endorsed district conclusion petitioner failed show clear convincing evidence respondent acted actual malice defined new york times evidence managing editor american opinion knew falsity accusations made article fact knew nothing petitioner except learned article correctly noted mere proof failure investigate without establish reckless disregard truth rather publisher must act high degree awareness probable falsity amant thompson accord beckley newspapers hanks garrison louisiana evidence case reveal respondent cause awareness appeals therefore affirmed reasons stated reverse ii principal issue case whether newspaper broadcaster publishes defamatory falsehoods individual neither public official public figure may claim constitutional privilege liability injury inflicted statements considered question rather different set facts presented rosenbloom metromedia rosenbloom distributor nudist magazines arrested selling allegedly obscene material making delivery retail dealer police obtained warrant seized entire inventory books magazines sought obtained injunction prohibiting police interference business sued local radio station failing note two newscasts items seized reportedly allegedly obscene broadcasting references smut literature racket girliebook peddlers coverage proceeding injunctive relief obtained judgment radio station appeals third circuit held new york times privilege applicable broadcast reversed affirmed decision majority agree controlling rationale eight justices participated rosenbloom announced views five separate opinions none commanded three votes several statements reveal disagreement appropriate result case also reflect divergent traditions thought general problem reconciling law defamation first amendment one approach extend new york times test expanding variety situations another vary level constitutional privilege defamatory falsehood status person defamed third view grant press broadcast media absolute immunity liability defamation place holding proper context preface discussion case review several rosenbloom opinions antecedents affirming trial judgment instant case appeals relied justice brennan conclusion rosenbloom plurality discussion communication involving matters public general concern warrant protection liability defamation accorded rule originally enunciated new york times sullivan defined constitutional privilege intended free criticism public officials restraints imposed common law defamation times ran political advertisement endorsing civil rights demonstrations black students alabama impliedly condemning performance local officials police commissioner established state certain misstatements advertisement referred constituted libel per se alabama law showing left times single defense truth alabama law neither good faith reasonable care protect newspaper liability concluded rule compelling critic official conduct guarantee truth factual assertions deter protected speech announced constitutional privilege designed counter effect constitutional guarantees require think federal rule prohibits public official recovering damages defamatory falsehood relating official conduct unless proves statement made actual malice knowledge false reckless disregard whether false opinion plurality rosenbloom metromedia justice brennan took new york times privilege one step concluded protection extend defamatory falsehoods relating private persons statements concerned matters general public interest abjured suggested distinction public officials public figures one hand private individuals focused instead society interest learning certain issues matter subject public general interest suddenly become less merely private individual involved sense individual voluntarily choose become involved thus plurality opinion private citizen involuntarily associated matter general interest recourse injury reputation unless satisfy demanding requirements new york times test two members concurred result rosenbloom departed reasoning plurality justice black restated view long shared justice douglas first amendment cloaks news media absolute indefeasible immunity liability defamation mr justice white concurred narrower ground ibid concluded first amendment gives press broadcast media privilege report comment upon official actions public servants full detail requirement reputation privacy individual involved affected official action spared public view therefore declined reach broader questions addressed justices justice harlan dissented although joined opinion new york times curtis publishing contested extension privilege public figures argued public figure held governmental office allowed recover damages defamation showing highly unreasonable conduct constituting extreme departure standards investigation reporting ordinarily adhered responsible publishers curtis publishing opinion justice harlan distinguished new york times primarily ground defamation actions public officials lay close seditious libel recovery damages one held public office however viewed vindication governmental policy additionally intimated public officials enjoyed absolute immunity liability defamatory utterances barr matteo lacked strong claim protection courts rosenbloom justice harlan modified views acquiesced application privilege defamation public figures argued different rule obtain defamatory falsehood harmed private individual noted private person less likelihood securing access channels communication sufficient rebut falsehoods concerning public officials public figures voluntarily placed public spotlight justice harlan concluded constitutionally allow private individuals recover damages defamation basis standard care except liability without fault justice marshall dissented rosenbloom opinion joined justice stewart thought plurality public general interest test determining applicability new york times privilege involve courts dangerous business deciding information relevant also contended plurality position inadequately served society interest protecting private individuals thrust public eye distorting light defamation ibid justice marshall therefore reached conclusion also reached justice harlan essentially free continue evolution common law defamation articulate whatever fault standard best suits state need long impose liability without fault principal point disagreement among three dissenters concerned punitive damages whereas justice harlan thought allow punitive damages amounts bearing reasonable purposeful relationship actual harm done justice marshall concluded size unpredictability jury awards exemplary damages unnecessarily exacerbated problems media damages therefore forbidden iii begin common ground first amendment thing false idea however pernicious opinion may seem depend correction conscience judges juries competition ideas constitutional value false statements fact neither intentional lie careless error materially advances society interest uninhibited robust debate public issues new york times sullivan belong category utterances essential part exposition ideas slight social value step truth benefit may derived clearly outweighed social interest order morality chaplinsky new hampshire although erroneous statement fact worthy constitutional protection nevertheless inevitable free debate james madison pointed report virginia resolutions degree abuse inseparable proper use every thing instance true press elliot debates federal constitution punishment error runs risk inducing cautious restrictive exercise constitutionally guaranteed freedoms speech press decisions recognize rule strict liability compels publisher broadcaster guarantee accuracy factual assertions may lead intolerable allowing media avoid liability proving truth injurious statements accord adequate protection first amendment liberties stated new york times sullivan supra allowance defense truth burden proving defendant mean false speech deterred first amendment requires protect falsehood order protect speech matters need avoid news media however societal value issue embraced long ago view publishers broadcasters enjoy unconditional indefeasible immunity liability defamation see new york times sullivan supra black concurring garrison louisiana douglas concurring curtis publishing butts opinion black rule indeed obviate fear prospect civil liability injurious falsehood might dissuade timorous press effective exercise first amendment freedoms yet absolute protection communications media requires total sacrifice competing value served law defamation legitimate state interest underlying law libel compensation individuals harm inflicted defamatory falsehood lightly require state abandon purpose justice stewart reminded us individual right protection good name reflects basic concept essential dignity worth every human concept root decent system ordered liberty protection private personality like protection life left primarily individual ninth tenth amendments mean right entitled less recognition basic constitutional system rosenblatt baer concurring opinion new york times standard defines level constitutional protection appropriate context defamation public person reason notoriety achievements vigor success seek public attention properly classed public figures hold governmental office may recover injury reputation clear convincing proof defamatory falsehood made knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth standard administers extremely powerful antidote inducement media rule strict liability libel slander exacts correspondingly high price victims defamatory falsehood plainly many deserving plaintiffs including intentionally subjected injury unable surmount barrier new york times test despite substantial abridgment state law right compensation wrongful hurt one reputation concluded protection new york times privilege available publishers broadcasters defamatory falsehood concerning public officials public figures new york times sullivan supra curtis publishing butts supra think decisions correct find holdings justified solely reference interest press broadcast media immunity liability rather believe new york times rule accommodation concern limited state interest present context libel actions brought public persons reasons stated conclude state interest compensating injury reputation private individuals requires different rule obtain respect theoretically course balance needs press individual claim compensation wrongful injury might struck basis justice harlan hypothesized might seem purely abstract matter utilitarian approach scrutinize carefully every jury verdict every libel case order ascertain whether final judgment leaves fully protected whatever first amendment values transcend legitimate state interest protecting particular plaintiff prevailed rosenbloom metromedia omitted approach lead unpredictable results uncertain expectations render duty supervise lower courts unmanageable ad hoc resolution competing interests stake particular case feasible must lay broad rules general application rules necessarily treat alike various cases involving differences well similarities thus often true considerations justify adoption given rule obtain particular case decided authority caveat difficulty distinguishing among defamation plaintiffs first remedy victim defamation using available opportunities contradict lie correct error thereby minimize adverse impact reputation public officials public figures usually enjoy significantly greater access channels effective communication hence realistic opportunity counteract false statements private individuals normally enjoy private individuals therefore vulnerable injury state interest protecting correspondingly greater important likelihood private individuals lack effective opportunities rebuttal compelling normative consideration underlying distinction public private defamation plaintiffs individual decides seek governmental office must accept certain necessary consequences involvement public affairs runs risk closer public scrutiny might otherwise case society interest officers government strictly limited formal discharge official duties pointed garrison louisiana public interest extends anything might touch official fitness office personal attributes germane fitness office dishonesty malfeasance improper motivation even though characteristics may also affect official private character classed public figures stand similar position hypothetically may possible someone become public figure purposeful action instances truly involuntary public figures must exceedingly rare part attain status assumed roles especial prominence affairs society occupy positions persuasive power influence deemed public figures purposes commonly classed public figures thrust forefront particular public controversies order influence resolution issues involved either event invite attention comment even foregoing generalities obtain every instance communications media entitled act assumption public officials public figures voluntarily exposed increased risk injury defamatory falsehood concerning assumption justified respect private individual accepted public office assumed influential role ordering society curtis publishing butts warren concurring result relinquished part interest protection good name consequently compelling call courts redress injury inflicted defamatory falsehood thus private individuals vulnerable injury public officials public figures also deserving recovery reasons conclude retain substantial latitude efforts enforce legal remedy defamatory falsehood injurious reputation private individual extension new york times test proposed rosenbloom plurality abridge legitimate state interest degree find unacceptable occasion additional difficulty forcing state federal judges decide ad hoc basis publications address issues general public interest determine words justice marshall information relevant rosenbloom metromedia doubt wisdom committing task conscience judges constitution require us draw thin line drastic alternatives new york times privilege common law strict liability defamatory error public general interest test determining applicability new york times standard private defamation actions inadequately serves competing values stake one hand private individual whose reputation injured defamatory falsehood concern issue public general interest recourse unless meet rigorous requirements new york times true despite factors distinguish state interest compensating private individuals analogous interest involved context public persons hand publisher broadcaster defamatory error deems unrelated issue public general interest may held liable damages even took every reasonable precaution ensure accuracy assertions liability may far exceed compensation actual injury plaintiff jury may permitted presume damages without proof loss even award punitive damages hold long impose liability without fault may define appropriate standard liability publisher broadcaster defamatory falsehood injurious private individual approach provides equitable boundary competing concerns involved recognizes strength legitimate state interest compensating private individuals wrongful injury reputation yet shields press broadcast media rigors strict liability defamation least conclusion obtains substance defamatory statement makes substantial danger reputation apparent phrase places perspective conclusion announce today inquiry involve considerations somewhat different discussed state purported condition civil liability factual misstatement whose content warn reasonably prudent editor broadcaster defamatory potential cf time hill case us intimate view proper resolution iv accommodation competing values stake defamation suits private individuals allows impose liability publisher broadcaster defamatory falsehood less demanding showing required new york times conclusion based belief considerations prompted adoption new york times privilege defamation public officials extension public figures wholly inapplicable context private individuals rather endorse approach recognition strong legitimate state interest compensating private individuals injury reputation countervailing state interest extends compensation actual injury reasons stated hold may permit recovery presumed punitive damages least liability based showing knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth common law defamation oddity tort law allows recovery purportedly compensatory damages without evidence actual loss traditional rules pertaining actions libel existence injury presumed fact publication juries may award substantial sums compensation supposed damage reputation without proof harm actually occurred largely uncontrolled discretion juries award damages loss unnecessarily compounds potential system liability defamatory falsehood inhibit vigorous exercise first amendment freedoms additionally doctrine presumed damages invites juries punish unpopular opinion rather compensate individuals injury sustained publication false fact point substantial interest securing plaintiffs petitioner gratuitous awards money damages far excess actual injury course invalidate state law simply doubt wisdom attempting reconcile state law competing interest grounded constitutional command first amendment therefore appropriate require state remedies defamatory falsehood reach farther necessary protect legitimate interest involved necessary restrict defamation plaintiffs prove knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth compensation actual injury need define actual injury trial courts wide experience framing appropriate jury instructions tort actions suffice say actual injury limited loss indeed customary types actual harm inflicted defamatory falsehood include impairment reputation standing community personal humiliation mental anguish suffering course juries must limited appropriate instructions awards must supported competent evidence concerning injury although need evidence assigns actual dollar value injury also find justification allowing awards punitive damages publishers broadcasters held liable standards liability defamation jurisdictions jury discretion amounts awarded limited gentle rule excessive consequently juries assess punitive damages wholly unpredictable amounts bearing necessary relation actual harm caused remain free use discretion selectively punish expressions unpopular views like doctrine presumed damages jury discretion award punitive damages unnecessarily exacerbates danger media unlike former rule punitive damages wholly irrelevant state interest justifies negligence standard private defamation actions compensation injury instead private fines levied civil juries punish reprehensible conduct deter future occurrence short private defamation plaintiff established liability less demanding standard stated new york times may recover damages sufficient compensate actual injury notwithstanding refusal extend new york times privilege defamation private individuals respondent contends affirm judgment ground petitioner either public official public figure little basis former assertion several years prior present incident petitioner served briefly housing committees appointed mayor chicago time publication never held remunerative governmental position respondent admits argues petitioner appearance coroner inquest rendered de facto public official cases recognize concept respondent suggestion sweep lawyers new york times rule officers distort plain meaning public official category beyond recognition decline follow respondent characterization petitioner public figure raises different question designation may rest either two alternative bases instances individual may achieve pervasive fame notoriety becomes public figure purposes contexts commonly individual voluntarily injects drawn particular public controversy thereby becomes public figure limited range issues either case persons assume special prominence resolution public questions petitioner long active community professional affairs served officer local civic groups various professional organizations published several books articles legal subjects although petitioner consequently well known circles achieved general fame notoriety community none prospective jurors called trial ever heard petitioner prior litigation respondent offered proof response atypical local population lightly assume citizen participation community professional affairs rendered public figure purposes absent clear evidence general fame notoriety community pervasive involvement affairs society individual deemed public personality aspects life preferable reduce question meaningful context looking nature extent individual participation particular controversy giving rise defamation context plain petitioner public figure played minimal role coroner inquest participation related solely representation private client took part criminal prosecution officer nuccio moreover never discussed either criminal civil litigation press never quoted done plainly thrust vortex public issue engage public attention attempt influence outcome persuaded trial err refusing characterize petitioner public figure purpose litigation therefore conclude new york times standard inapplicable case trial erred entering judgment respondent jury allowed impose liability without fault permitted presume damages without proof injury new trial necessary reverse remand proceedings accord opinion ordered footnotes supp petitioner asserts entry judgment basis failure show knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth constituted unfair surprise deprived full fair opportunity prove actual malice part respondent contention supported record clear trial gave petitioner reason assume new york times privilege available respondent memorandum opinion denying respondent pretrial motion summary judgment state new york times standard inapplicable case rather reveals trial judge thought possible petitioner make factual showing sufficient overcome respondent claim constitutional privilege part factual dispute existence actual malice summary judgment improper instant case jury might infer evidence respondent failure investigate truth allegations coupled receipt communications challenging factual accuracy author past amounted actual malice reckless disregard whether allegations true new york times sullivan mem stated petitioner considerable stature lawyer author lecturer participant matters public import undermine validity assumption public figure term used progeny new york times nevertheless purposes decision make assumption test availability claim privilege subject matter article appeals petitioner made ingenious unavailing attempt show respondent defamatory charge concerned issue public general interest asserted subject matter article murder trial officer nuccio participate proceeding therefore argued even subject matter article generally protected new york times privilege opinion rosenbloom plurality defamatory statements appeals rejected argument noted accusations petitioner played integral part respondent general thesis nationwide conspiracy harass police may also assume article basic thesis false nevertheless reasoning new york times sullivan even false statement fact made support false thesis protected unless made knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth falsity undermine rule case permit actual falsity statement determine whether publisher entitled benefit rule therefore put one side false character article treat though contents entirely true denied comments petitioner integral central thesis must tested new york times standard justice douglas participate consideration decision rosenbloom new york times later cases explicated meaning new standard new york times held circumstances newspaper failure check accuracy advertisement news stories files establish reckless disregard truth amant thompson equated reckless disregard truth subjective awareness probable falsity must sufficient evidence permit conclusion defendant fact entertained serious doubts truth publication beckley newspapers hanks emphasized distinction new york times test knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth actual malice traditional sense garrison louisiana made plain new standard applied criminal libel laws well civil actions governed criticism directed anything might touch official fitness office finally rosenblatt baer stated public official designation applies least among hierarchy government employees appear public substantial responsibility control conduct governmental affairs time hill applied new york times standard actions unusual state statute statute create cause action libel rather provided remedy unwanted publicity although law allowed recovery damages harm caused exposure public attention rather factual inaccuracies recognized truth complete defense thus nondefamatory factual errors render publisher liable something akin invasion privacy ruled defendant action invoke new york times privilege regardless fame anonymity plaintiff speaking justice brennan declared holding extension new york times rather parallel line reasoning applying standard discrete context neither libel action private individual statutory action public official therefore although first amendment principles pronounced new york times guide conclusion reach conclusion applying principles discrete context therefore serves purpose distinguish facts new york times libel action distinction suggested relative opportunities public official private individual rebut defamatory charges might germane additional state interest protection individual damage reputation involved cf rosenblatt baer stewart concurring professor kalven introduced discussion cases apt heading ca tell players without score card kalven reasonable man first amendment hill butts walker sup rev three justices joined justice harlan analysis issues involved concurring opinion chief justice warren stated principle cases stand new york times test reaches public figures public officials justice brennan justice white agreed chief justice question justice black justice douglas reiterated view publishers absolute immunity liability defamation acquiesced chief justice reasoning order enable majority justices agree question appropriate constitutional privilege defamation public figures thomas jefferson made point first inaugural address among us wish dissolve union change republican form let stand undisturbed monuments safety error opinion may tolerated reason left free combat course opportunity rebuttal seldom suffices undo harm defamatory falsehood indeed law defamation rooted experience truth rarely catches lie fact remedy rebuttal standing alone inadequate task mean irrelevant inquiry caveat strict liability prime target justice white dissent hold publisher broadcaster may required prove truth defamatory statement concerning private individual failing proof publisher broadcaster may held liable defamation even though took every conceivable precaution ensure accuracy offending statement prior dissemination post justice white view one publishes statement later turns inaccurate never without fault meaningful sense circulated falsehood required publish post emphasis added justice white characterizes new york times sullivan simply case seditious libel post rationale certainly inapplicable curtis publishing butts justice white joined four members extend standard media defamation persons identified public figures connected government justice white suggests abide vote post full thrust dissent read contradicts suggestion finally rosenbloom metromedia justice white voted apply new york times privilege media defamation individual neither public official public figure opinion standard apply media comment upon official actions public servants including defamatory falsehood person arrested police adopted conclusion significantly extend new york times privilege justice white asserts decision today trivializes denigrates interest reputation miami herald publishing tornillo ante concurring opinion scuttle libel laws wholesale fashion renders ordinary citizens powerless protect post light progressive extension requirement detailed preceding paragraph one might viewed today decision allowing recovery standard save strict liability generous accommodation state interest comprehensive reputational injury private individuals law presently affords curtis publishing butts supra justice blackmun concurring joined justice brennan opinion plurality rosenbloom metromedia concluded given new york times sullivan progeny noted ante well curtis publishing butts associated press walker step taken rosenbloom extending new york times doctrine event public general interest logical inevitable majority evidently thought otherwise particularly evidenced justice white separate concurring opinion respective dissenting opinions justice harlan justice marshall joined justice stewart today refuses apply new york times private individual contrasted public official public figure thus withdraws factual limits cases thereby fixes outer boundary new york times doctrine says beyond boundary state free define appropriate standard media liability long impose liability without fault joinder rosenbloom plurality opinion intimate sense illogic however seeks today strike balance competing values necessarily uncertain assumptions human behavior color result although opinion present case departs rationale rosenbloom plurality conditions libel action private person upon showing negligence contrasted showing willful reckless disregard willing join join opinion judgment two reasons removing specters presumed punitive damages absence new york times malice eliminates significant powerful motives otherwise present traditional libel action leaves prove sufficient adequate breathing space vigorous press done believe little practical effect functioning responsible journalism sadly fractionated rosenbloom result kind inevitably leads uncertainty feel profound importance come rest defamation area clearly defined majority position eliminates unsureness engendered rosenbloom diversity vote needed create majority adhere prior view definitive ruling however paramount see curtis publishing butts black concurring time hill black concurring vuitch separate statement reasons join opinion judgment chief justice burger dissenting doctrines law defamation gradual evolution primarily state courts new york times sullivan progeny entered field agreement disagreement law evolved time alter fact orderly development consistent basic rationale today opinion abandons traditional thread far ordinary private citizen concerned introduces concept media liable negligence publishing defamatory statements respect persons although agree much justice white read new doctrinal approach quite way frank say know parameters negligence doctrine applied news media conceivably new doctrine inhibit editors dissents justice douglas justice brennan suggest prefer allow area law continue evolve respect private citizens rather embark new doctrinal theory jurisprudential ancestry petitioner performing professional representative role advocate highest tradition law tradition advocate invidiously identified client important public policy underlies tradition right counsel gravely jeopardized every lawyer takes unpopular case civil criminal automatically become fair game irresponsible reporters editors might example describe lawyer mob mouthpiece representing client serious prior criminal record ambulance chaser representing claimant personal injury action reverse judgment appeals remand reinstatement verdict jury entry appropriate judgment verdict justice douglas dissenting describes case return struggle defin ing proper accommodation law defamation freedoms speech press protected first amendment indeed struggle described justice black quagmire helplessly struggling field obscenity curtis publishing butts concurring opinion suggest struggle quite hopeless one light command first amendment accommodation freedoms proper except made framers unlike right privacy terms fourth amendment must accommodated reasonable searches seizures warrants issued magistrates rights free speech free press protected framers verbiage whose proscription seems clear stated view first amendment bar congress passing libel law view held thomas jefferson one congress never challenged enactment civil libel statute sole congressional attempt variety first amendment muzzle sedition act criminal libel act never tested one expired terms three years enactment president thomas jefferson pardoned convicted act fines levied prosecution repaid act congress general consensus act constituted regrettable legislative exercise plainly violation first amendment first amendment made applicable fourteenth see ability accommodate freedoms speech press congress true whether form accommodation civil criminal since hat state may constitutionally bring means criminal statute likewise beyond reach civil law libel new york times sullivan like congress without power use civil libel law law impose damages merely discussing public affairs black concurring continued recognition possibility state libel suits public discussion public issues leaves freedom speech honored fourteenth amendment diluted version first amendment protection view possible one accepts position first amendment applicable due process clause fourteenth due process freedom speech freedom might deem implicit concept ordered liberty frequently rested state free speech free press decisions fourteenth amendment generally rather due process clause alone fourteenth amendment speaks due process also privileges immunities citizenship conceive privilege immunity higher claim recognition state abridgment freedoms speech press federal system subject two governmental regimes freedoms speech press protected infringement one quite illusory identity oppressor think matter relative indifference oppressed doubt state impinges upon free open discussion sanctions imposition damages discussion civil libel laws discussion public affairs often marked highly charged emotions jurymen unlike us subject emotions indeed type speech reason first amendment since speech arouses little emotion little need protection vehicle publication case american opinion controversial periodical disseminates views john birch society organization many deem quite offensive subject matter involved communist plots conspiracies law enforcement agencies killing private citizen police amalgam controversial elements pressing upon jury jury determination unpredictable neutral circumstances becomes venture discuss heated issues virtual roll dice separating liability often massive claims damage hardy publisher engage discussion face risk preoccupation proliferating standards area libel increases risks matters little whether standard articulated malice reckless disregard truth negligence jury determinations criteria virtually unreviewable continuing delineation variegated mantles first amendment protection like potential publisher left speculation jury findings influenced effect subject matter publication upon minds viscera jury standard announced today leaves free define appropriate standard liability publisher broadcaster circumstances case course leaves simple negligence standard option jury free impose damages upon finding publisher failed act reasonable man continued erosion first amendment protection fear may well reasonable man refrains speaking since view first fourteenth amendments prohibit imposition damages upon respondent discussion public affairs affirm judgment see rosenblatt baer concurring jefferson stated first amendment thereby guard sentence words freedom religion speech press insomuch whatever violates either throws sanctuary covers others libels falsehood defamation equally heresy false religion withheld cognizance federal tribunals works thomas jefferson ford ed emphasis added see act july stat accompanied sess senator calhoun reporting congress assumed invalidity act matter one doubts report senate bill doc see stromberg california since case involves discussion public affairs need decide point whether first amendment prohibits libel actions unconditional right say one pleases public affairs consider minimum guarantee first amendment new york times sullivan black concurring emphasis added public affairs includes great deal merely political affairs matters science economics business art literature matters interest general public indeed matter sufficient general interest prompt media coverage may said public affair certainly police killings communist conspiracies like qualify regressive view free speech surfaced thus far gained judicial acceptance solicitor general bork stated constitutional protection accorded speech explicitly political basis judicial intervention protect form expression scientific literary variety expression call obscene pornographic moreover within category speech ordinarily call political constitutional obstruction laws making criminal speech advocates forcible overthrow government violation law bork neutral principles first amendment problems ind see palko connecticut justice black noted view test becomes whether government interest abridging right involved whether interest sufficient importance opinion majority justify government action doctrine used justify almost government suppression first amendment freedoms stated many times subscribe doctrine believe first amendment unequivocal command shall abridgement rights free speech shows men drafted bill rights balancing done field black constitutional faith see bridges california black murdock pennsylvania douglas saia new york douglas talley california black degregory attorney general new hampshire douglas elfbrandt russell douglas mills alabama black mine workers illinois bar black justice brennan dissenting agree conclusion expressed part opinion time publication respondent article petitioner properly viewed either public official public figure instead respondent article dealing alleged conspiracy discredit local police forces concerned petitioner purported involvement event public general interest roosenbloom metromedia see ante agree however free robust debate essential proper functioning system government permitted adequate breathing space naacp button holds may impose strict liability defamation defamed party private person substance defamatory statement makes substantial danger reputation apparent ante adhere view expressed rosenbloom metromedia supra strike proper accommodation avoidance media protection individual reputations require apply new york times sullivan standard civil libel actions concerning media reports involvement private individuals events public general interest hold first amendment guarantees extend speech concerning private persons involvement events public general interest recognizes country perseveres profound national commitment principle debate public issues uninhibited robust emphasis added thus guarantees free speech press necessarily reach far knowledge debate strictly official activities various levels government rosenbloom metromedia supra reedom discussion fulfill historic function nation must embrace issues information needed appropriate enable members society cope exigencies period thornhill alabama teaching distilled prior cases public interest events may times influenced notoriety individuals involved public primary interest event conduct participant content effect significance conduct rosenbloom supra matters public general interest suddenly become less merely private individual involved sense individual voluntarily choose become involved ibid see time hill although acknowledging first amendment values less significance media reports concern private persons involvement matters public concern refuses provide cases level constitutional protection afforded media context defamation public persons accommodation established free speech libel laws cases involving public officials public figures defamatory falsehood shown clear convincing evidence published knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth apt holds private individual degree access media rebut defamatory comments public person voluntarily exposed public scrutiny arguments forcefully eloquently presented accept reasons stated rosenbloom new york times standard applied libel public official public figure give effect first amendment function encourage ventilation public issues public official less interest protecting reputation individual private life argument public figures need less protection command media attention counter criticism may true prominent people even rare case denial overtakes original charge denials retractions corrections hot news rarely receive prominence original story public official public figure minor functionary left position put public eye argument loses force vast majority libels involving public officials public figures ability respond media depend complex factor ability private individual depends unpredictable event media continuing interest story thus unproved highly improbable generalization yet fully defined class public figures involved matters public concern better able respond media private individuals also involved matters seems insubstantial reed rest constitutional distinction oluntarily public men degree conversely aspects lives even public men fall outside area matters public general concern see griswold connecticut thus idea certain public figures voluntarily exposed entire lives public inspection private individuals kept carefully shrouded public view best legal fiction event distinction easily produce paradoxical result dampening discussion issues public general concern happen involve private citizens extending constitutional encouragement discussion aspects lives public figures area public general concern rosenbloom supra omitted recognized new york times sullivan supra rule requiring critic official conduct guarantee truth factual contentions inevitably lead publishers fearful unable prove truth unable bear expense attempting simply eschewed printing controversial articles adoption many standard cases private individuals involved matters public interest probable result today decision likewise lead since publishers required carefully weigh myriad uncertain factors publication standard elusive time hill supra saddles press intolerable burden guessing jury might assess reasonableness steps taken verify accuracy every reference name picture portrait ibid regime publishers broadcasters make judgments juror assessment diverse considerations size operating procedures financial condition newsgathering system well relative costs benefits instituting less frequent costly reporting higher level accuracy see term harv rev moreover contrast proof clear convincing evidence required new york times test burden proof reasonable care doubtless preponderance evidence normal civil suit preponderance evidence standard employed view serious general erroneous verdict defendant favor erroneous verdict plaintiff favor winship harlan concurring libel cases however view erroneous verdict plaintiff serious mulct defendant innocent misstatement possibility error even beyond vagueness negligence standard create strong impetus toward first amendment tolerate rosenbloom discount altogether danger jurors punish expression unpopular opinions probability accounts limitation may permit recovery presumed punitive damages least liability based showing knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth ante plainly jury latitude impose liability want due care poses far greater threat suppressing unpopular views possible recovery presumed punitive damages moreover examples actual injury including impairment reputation standing community well personal humiliation mental anguish suffering inevitably allow jury bent punishing expression unpopular views formidable weapon finally even limitation recovery actual injury however much reduces size frequency recoveries provide necessary elbowroom first amendment expression simply possibility judgment damages results possibility engage litigation expensive protracted process threat enough cause discussion debate steer far wider unlawful zone thereby keeping protected discussion public cognizance small newspaper suffers equally substantial damage award whether label award actual punitive rosenbloom supra since petitioner failed given full fair opportunity prove respondent published disputed article knowledge falsity reckless disregard truth see ante affirm judgment appeals fortiori disagree brother white view free rein impose strict liability defamation cases involving public persons respected commentator observed factors purely legal constraints operate control press traditions attitudes general rules political conduct far important controls fear opening credibility gap thereby lessening one influence holds participants check institutional pressures large organizations including press similar effect difficult organization open policy making intentionally false accusations emerson system freedom expression taking novel step limit application first amendment protection private libels involving issues general public interest forbid imposing liability without fault case substance defamatory statement made substantial danger reputation apparent rosenbloom metromedia leave open question constitutional standard applies defamatory falsehoods published broadcast concerning either private public person activities within scope general public interest parenthetically brother white argues view mine prevent plaintiff unable demonstrate degree fault vindicating reputation securing judgment publication false argument overlooks possible enactment statutes requiring proof fault provide action retraction publication determination falsity plaintiff able demonstrate false statements published concerning activities cf note vindication reputation public official harv rev although may questions raised concerning constitutionality statutes certainly nothing said today read opinion nothing said read imply private plaintiff unable prove fault must inevitably denied opportunity secure judgment upon truth falsity statements published cf rosenbloom metromedia supra justice white dissenting years founding nation law defamation right ordinary citizen recover false publication injurious reputation almost exclusively business state courts legislatures typical state defamation law defamed private citizen prove false publication subject hatred contempt ridicule given publication general damage reputation presumed punitive damages required proof additional facts law governing defamation private citizens remained untouched first amendment relatively recently consistent view libelous words constitute class speech wholly unprotected first amendment subject limited exceptions carved since using amendment chosen instrument printed pages federalized major aspects libel law declaring unconstitutional important respects prevailing defamation law result accomplished requiring plaintiff every defamation action prove defendant culpability beyond act publishing defamatory material also actual damage reputation resulting publication moreover punitive damages may recovered showing malice traditional sense ill knowing falsehood reckless disregard truth required assume sweeping changes popular press road salvation law see wholly insufficient grounds scuttling libel laws wholesale fashion say nothing deprecating reputation interest ordinary citizens rendering powerless protect suggest decision illegitimate beyond bounds judicial review exercise power entrusted particularly benefit briefs argument addressed major issues decides respectfully dissent lest mistake changes wrought decision cut deeply restatement torts reflected historic rule publication written form defamatory material material tending harm reputation another lower estimation community deter third persons associating dealing subjected publisher liability although special harm reputation actually proved restatement torts truth defense libels privileged given false circulation general damage reputation presumed damages awarded jury along special damages pecuniary loss emotional distress least rule allowed recovery nominal damages defamatory publication actionable per se thus performed vindicatory function enabling plaintiff publicly brand defamatory publication false salutary social value rule preventive character since often permits defamed person expose groundless character defamatory rumor harm reputation resulted therefrom comment damages libel slander per se included harm caused thereby reputation person defamed absence proof harm harm normally results defamation heart damage scheme lay award general damages loss reputation granted without special proof judgment history content publication likely cause injury many cases effect defamatory statements subtle indirect impossible directly trace effects thereof loss person defamed comment proof actual injury reputation insufficient proof special damage necessary support liability slander actionable per se special damage form material pecuniary loss proved general damages injury reputation without proof plaintiff may recover special harm caused also general loss reputation comment right recover emotional distress depended upon defendant otherwise liable either libel slander punitive damages recoverable upon proof special facts amounting express malice comment preparations restatement second torts reflected deemed substantial changes law defamation primarily trend toward limiting per se libels defamatory nature publication apparent face defamatory innuendo apparent publication without reference extrinsic facts way inducement restatement second torts tent draft apr libels sort slanders per se continued recognized actionable without proof special damage injury reputation defamations require proof special injury form material pecuniary loss whether asserted change reflected prevailing law heavily debated unquestioned time recurring situations libel slander actionable per se surveying current state law proposed restatement second observed courts except virginia agree libel defamatory upon face actionable without proof damage restatement second torts tent draft apr ten jurisdictions continued support old rule libel defamatory face whose innuendo depends extrinsic facts actionable without proof damage although slander jurisdictions said hold libel defamatory face treated like slander thus actionable without proof damage slander law six jurisdictions found unsettled state likely consistent restatement second law virginia thought consider libel actionable without proof special damage slander regardless whether libel defamatory face therefore time thought recognize important categories defamation actionable per se question apparently raised time upon proof special damage form material pecuinary loss general damages reputation recovered without proof unquestionably state law continued recognize absolute well conditional privileges publish defamatory materials including privilege fair comment defined situations remained true wide range situations ordinary citizen make prima facie case without proving defamatory publication recover general damages injury reputation unless defeated defense truth impact today decision traditional law libel immediately obvious indisputable longer plaintiff able rest case proof libel defamatory face proof slander historically actionable per se addition must prove degree culpable conduct part publisher intentional reckless falsehood negligence succeeds respect faces still another obstacle recovery loss reputation conditioned upon competent proof actual injury standing community true regardless nature defamation even though one particularly reprehensible statements traditionally made slanderous words actionable without proof fault publisher damaging impact publication rejects judgment experience publications inherently capable injury actual injury difficult prove risk falsehood borne publisher victim plainly additional burden plaintiff proving negligence fault exceedingly difficult perhaps impossible vindicate reputation interest securing judgment nominal damages practical effect judgment judicial declaration publication indeed false new rule plaintiff lose statement true negligently made requirement proving special injury reputation general damages may awarded clearly eliminate prevailing rule worked long period time case defamations actionable per se recovery general damages injury reputation may also form material pecuniary loss proved finally inflexible federal standard imposed award punitive damages longer enough prove ill attempt injure radical changes law severe invasions prerogatives least shown required first amendment necessitated present circumstances neither demonstrated course new york times sullivan rosenblatt baer curtis publishing butts associated press walker worked major changes defamation law public officials public figures recover general damages injury reputation must prove knowing falsehood reckless disregard truth required conform decisions thereafter rosenbloom metromedia three members urged standard applied whenever publication concerned event public general concern none cases purported foreclose circumstances recovery ordinary citizen traditional standards liability today majority supported proposition given liability jury may award general damages reasonable amount without proof injury brief period since rosenbloom decided least several federal courts appeals felt obliged consider new york times constitutional privilege liability extending words rosenbloom plurality discussion communication involving matters public general concern apparently however general damages still remain recoverable standard liability satisfied except public officials public figures concerned repudiates plurality opinion rosenbloom appears espouse liability standard set forth three justices case must struggle discern meaning concepts liability without fault fashion novel rules recovery damages matters briefed argued parties workability seriously explored nevertheless yielding apparently irresistible impulse announce new different interpretation first amendment discards history precedent rush refashion defamation law accordance inclinations perhaps evanescent majority justices ii contend hardly wrote first amendment intended prohibit federal government within sphere influence territories district columbia providing private citizen peaceful remedy damaging falsehood time adoption first amendment many consequences libel law already described developed particularly rule libels slanders inherently injurious actionable without special proof damage reputation pointed roth ratified constitution provided constitutional guarantees free expression nevertheless provided prosecution libels prior revolution american colonies adopted common law libel contrary popular notions freedom press sharply curtailed colonial america seditious libel punished contempt colonial legislatures criminal offense colonial courts scant evidence exists first amendment intended abolish common law libel least extent depriving ordinary citizens meaningful redress defamers contrary conceded sides rules subjected libeler responsibility private injury public scandal disorder occasioned conduct abolished protection extended press constitutions cooley constitutional limitations ed one doubt society legislature right duty prohibit certain forms speech libelous assertions may must forbidden punished must slander necessities speech limited recognized provided constitution unknown writers first amendment amendment may take granted forbid abridging speech time forbid abridging freedom speech solving paradox apparent summoned free men wish know right freedom speech political freedom constitutional powers people professor zechariah chafee noted first amendment scholar persuasively argued conditions arbitrarily fix division lawful unlawful speech time free speech time however notes framers may intended abolish seditious libels prevent prosecutions federal government criticism government free speech clauses wipe common law obscenity profanity defamation individuals debates congress bill rights unclear inconclusive articulated intention framers free press guarantee know benjamin franklin john adams william cushing favored limiting freedom press truthful statements others james wilson suggested restatement blackstone standard jefferson endorsed madison formula congress shall make law abridging freedom speech press suggested people shall deprived right speak write otherwise publish anything false facts affecting injuriously life liberty reputation others mott jefferson press bygone years repeatedly dealt libel slander actions district columbia territories although cases first amendment considerations expressly discussed opinions unmistakably revealed classic law libel firmly place areas federal law controlled see washington post chaloner baker warner nalle oyster dorr pollard lyon white nicholls consistent view prior new york times sullivan defamatory utterances wholly unprotected first amendment patterson colorado ex rel attorney general example said although freedom speech press protected abridgment constitution provisions prevent subsequent punishment may deemed contrary public welfare statement repeated near minnesota ex rel olson adding recognized punishment abuse liberty accorded press essential protection public common law rules subject libeler responsibility public offense well private injury abolished protection extended constitutions certain narrowly limited classes speech prevention punishment never thought raise constitutional problem include lewd obscene profane libelous insulting fighting words utterance inflict injury tend incite immediate breach peace well observed utterances essential part exposition ideas slight social value step truth benefit may derived clearly outweighed social interest order morality light history apparent unconditional phrasing first amendment intended protect every utterance phrasing prevent concluding libelous utterances within area constitutionally protected speech beauharnais illinois time adoption first amendment obscenity law fully developed libel law sufficiently contemporaneous evidence show obscenity outside protection intended speech press central meaning new york times first amendment relates libel laws seditious libel criticism government public officials falls beyond police power state democratic society citizen privilege criticizing government officials neither new york times progeny suggest first amendment intended circumstances deprive private citizen historic recourse redress published falsehoods damaging reputation contrary history precedent amendment interpreted simply put first amendment confer license defame citizen douglas right people labor foregoing matters contend foreclosed reconsidering prior interpretations first amendment apparently finds clean slate fact instructive historical experience dating long first settlers notions democratic government human freedom journeyed land given rich background history precedent deal fundamentals construe first amendment proceed care presented compelling reasons jettison settled law even radical extent iii concedes dangers insufficient override state interest protecting reputation private individuals helpless deserving state concern public persons access media defend therefore refuses condition private plaintiff recovery showing intentional reckless falsehood required new york times nevertheless extends reach first amendment defamation actions requiring ordinary citizen libeled publication defamatory face must prove degree culpability part publisher beyond circulation public damaging falsehood rule least strict called defamatory character publication apparent face ante furthermore major hurdle establish liability surmounted requires proof actual injury reputation damages injury may awarded proceeds though writing tabula rasa suggests must mediate two unacceptable choices one hand rigors new york times rule thinks give insufficient recognition interest private plaintiff hand prospect imposing liability without fault press others charged defamatory utterances totally ignoring history settled first amendment law purports arrive equitable compromise rejecting considers faultless liability new york times malice insisting intermediate degree fault course necessarily discards contrary judgment arrived reputation interest private citizen deserving considerably protection evinces antipathy liability without fault talismanic significance almost meaningless context appears addressing libels slanders defamatory face publisher doubt aware nature material inherently damaging reputation publishes notwithstanding knowing inflict injury knowledge must intend inflict injury excuse privileged published truth turns circulated public damaging falsehood nevertheless faultless perhaps said mistake defense made good faith fact remains launched publication knowing ruin reputation circumstances law heretofore put risk falsehood publisher victim private citizen grounds special privilege invoked shift risk victim even though done nothing invite calumny wholly innocent fault helpless avoid injury doubt jurisprudential resistance liability without fault sufficient ground employing first amendment revolutionize law libel view body legal rules poses realistic threat press service public press today vigorous robust quite incredible suggest threats libel suits private citizens causing press refrain publishing truth know hard facts support proposition furnishes none communications industry increasingly become concentrated powerful hands operating lucrative businesses reaching across nation almost every home neither industry whole individual components easily intimidated fortunate requiring pay occasional damage private reputation play substantial part future performance existence event principal concern protect communications industry large libel judgments appear new requirements respect general punitive damages ample protection also feels compelled escalate threshold standard liability fathom particularly eliminate many instances plaintiff possibility securing judicial determination damaging publication indeed false whether entitled recover money damages new rules plaintiff must prove defamatory statement also degree fault accompanying publication may wholly false wrong unjustified case nevertheless dismissed failure prove negligence fault part publisher find unacceptable distribute risk manner force wholly innocent victim bear injury two defamer culpable party circulated falsehood required publish difficult understand ordinary citizen carry risk damage suffer injury order vindicate first amendment values protecting press others liability circulating false information particularly true statements serve purpose whatsoever furthering public interest search truth contrary may frustrate search time inflict great injury defenseless individual owners press stockholders communications enterprises much better bear burden public large somehow pay essentially public benefit derived private expense iv content escalating threshold requirements establishing liability abolishes ordinary damages rule undisturbed new york times later cases libels slanders defamatory face injury reputation presumed general damages may awarded along whatever special damages may sought apparently feels unspecified unknown number cases plaintiffs recover suffered injury recover deserve dismisses rule oddity tort law thereby refuses case accept fact wide dissemination per se libel prima facie proof injury sufficient survive motion dismiss close plaintiff case said bears repeating even plaintiff recover monetary damages able prevail judgment publication false beyond courts legislatures literally centuries thought generality cases libeled plaintiffs seriously shortchanged must prove extent injury reputations even libels slanders face defamatory special damage must shown showing made general damages reputation injury recoverable without specific proof clearly right one point law defamation rooted experience truth rarely catches lie ante ignores experience teaches damage reputation recurringly difficult prove requiring actual proof repeatedly destroy chance adequate compensation eminent authority warned clear proof actual damage impossible great many cases character defamatory words circumstances publication certain serious harm resulted fact prosser law torts ed new rule respect general damages appears apply libels slanders whether defamatory face except gather plaintiff proves intentional falsehood reckless disregard although impact publication victim circumstances injury reputation may apparently presumed accordance traditional rule defamatory statement apt cause injury lie intentional negligent fail understand suggest judges juries must live rules find equally incomprehensible flourish pen also discards prevailing rule libel slander actions punitive damages may awarded classic grounds malice ctual malice sense ill fraud reckless indifference consequences mccormick law damages see also prosser supra hanson libel related torts note developments law defamation harv rev cal civ code stead requires defamation plaintiffs show intentional falsehood reckless disregard truth falsity publication complains substantial verdicts possibility press saying punitive damages merely private fines levied civil juries punish reprehensible conduct deter future occurrence ante see constitutional difference publishing reckless disregard truth punitive damages permitted negligent publication allowed difficult understand constitutionally wrong assessing punitive damages deter publisher departing standards care ordinarily followed publishing industry particularly malice also shown note also questionable premise juries assess punitive damages wholly unpredictable amounts bearing necessary relation actual harm caused ibid represents inaccurate view established practice another situations judges largely unfamiliar relatively rare actions defamation rely words without really going behind jury award type civil case may certainly unpredictable trial appellate courts increasingly vigilant ensuring jury result based upon rational consideration evidence proper application law reynolds pegler supp sdny aff cert denied see supra nn moreover courts require punitive damages bear reasonable relation compensatory damages award still others bar punitive damages condition award refusal print retraction danger immoderate verdicts certainly real one criterion applied judge setting reducing amount concededly vague subjective one nevertheless verdict may twice submitted complaining defendant common sense trained judicial minds motion new trial appeal must rare instance unjustifiable award escapes correction mccormick supra even assuming possibility verdicts excessive subscribe remedy face classic example judicial overkill apparently abandoning salutary new york times policy independent examination whole record assure judgment constitute forbidden intrusion field free expression substitutes inflexible rule barring recovery punitive damages absent proof constitutional malice first amendment majestic statement free people dedication uninhibited robust debate public issues grave disservice needlessly spend force almost years punitive damages first amendment peacefully coexisted demonstration state libel laws relate punitive damages necessitate majority extreme response fear read decision find words inaudible speaks voice power reason mapp ohio harlan dissenting disagreeing first amendment reach area state libel laws protecting nonpublic persons repudiate principle first amendment rests assumption widest possible dissemination information diverse antagonistic sources essential welfare public free press condition free society associated press see also miami herald publishing tornillo ante white concurring continue subscribe new york times decision decisions extending protection defamatory falsehoods public persons quarrel stems willingness sacrifice good sense syllogism find new york times doctrine infinite elasticity unfortunately expansion latest manifestation destructive potential good idea carried logical extreme recovery standards defamatory falsehoods private individual enjoys general fame notoriety community pervasive ly involve affairs society thrust vortex given public issue attempt influence outcome simply forbidden first amendment distinguished private study group put way accountability like subjection law necessarily net subtraction liberty first amendment intended guarantee free expression create privileged industry commission freedom press free responsible press case ultimately comes importance attaches society pervasive strong interest preventing redressing attacks upon reputation rosenblatt baer seen miscalculated denigrates interest time escalating assaults individuality personal dignity counsel otherwise least issue highly debatable carried heavy burden proof justify tampering state libel laws risk exposure concomitant life civilized community time hill private citizen bargain defamatory falsehoods society powerless vindicate unfair injury reputation fallacy assume first amendment guidepost area state defamation laws right man protection reputation unjustified invasion wrongful hurt reflects basic concept essential dignity worth every human concept root decent system ordered liberty protection private personality like protection life left primarily individual ninth tenth amendments mean right entitled less recognition basic constitutional system rosenblatt baer supra stewart concurring freedom human dignity decency antithetical indeed survive without exist precarious balance one always threatening overwhelm experience nation testifies ability democratic institutions harness dynamic tension one mechanisms seized upon common law accommodate forces civil libel action tried jury average citizens essentially fulfilled role necessarily best answer juristic philosophy common law bottom philosophy pragmatism truth relative absolute rule functions well produces title deed recognition cardozo selected writings hall ed foregoing reasons reverse judgment appeals reinstate jury verdict restatement torts see also prosser law torts ed hanson libel related torts pp harper james law torts pp observations part opinion current state law defamation various partially based upon restatement torts first published tentative drafts nos restatement torts second released respectively recent transmittal tentative draft dated april american law institute consideration resulted elimination much discussion prevailing defamation rules suggested changes many rules previously found earlier tentative drafts development appears largely influenced draftsmen sense law important subject thought stand restatement second torts vii tent draft apr evident large extent latest views colored plurality opinion rosenbloom metromedia see restatement second torts supra xiii indication latest draft however conclusions reached tentative drafts nos accurate reflection case law prior developments occasioned plurality opinion rosenbloom see infra see also prosser supra murnaghan figment fiction philosophy requirement proof damages libel actions cath rev proof defamation established fact injury existence damage right reputation jury permitted even without evidence assess damages considered natural probable consequences defamatory words restatement torts comment see also gatley libel slander ed newell slander libel ed see generally mccormick law damages pp respect therefore damages presumed impossibility affixing exact monetary amount present future injury plaintiff reputation wounded feelings humiliation loss business consequential physical illness pain ibid see also prosser supra harper james supra note developments law defamation harv rev also actionable per se libels imputation although apparent material slander per se spoken rather written restatement second torts pp tent draft apr see also murnaghan supra applying settled illinois law district case held libel per se label someone communist supp nd appears law illinois time gertz brought libel suit see brewer hearst publishing hotz alton telegraph printing app cooper illinois publishing printing app see west northern publishing alaska article linking owners taxicab companies illegal liquor sales minors gallman carnes ark matter concerning state law school professor assistant dean belli curtis publishing cal app cal rptr article concerning attorney national reputation moriarty lippe publication certain police officers firestone time divorce prominent citizen matter legitimate public concern state snyder la criminal defamation prosecution defeated mayoral candidate statements made another candidate twohig boston mass article concerning candidate votes legislature priestley hastings sons publishing lynn mass article architect commissioned town build school harnish md article concerning substandard rental property owned member city housing authority standke darby sons newspaper editorial concerning performance grand jurors whitmore kansas city star mo app article concerning juvenile officer operation detention home grand jury investigation trails west wolff suit congressman investigation death schoolchildren bus accident east street restaurant forbes magazine article concerning restaurant food kent city buffalo television station film plaintiff captured robber frink mceldowney article concerning attorney representing town mead horvitz publishing dist ohio app june unpublished cert denied financial condition participants development large apartment complex involving numerous local contractors washington world publishing article contract dispute candidate senate party county chairman matus triangle publications radio talk show host discussion gross overcharging snowplowing driveway considered event public general concern autobuses internacionales de el continental publishing tex civ app newspaper article concerning bus company raising fares without notice violation law sanders harris article concerning english professor community college old dominion branch austin rev ante plaintiff failure join labor union considered issue public general concern chase daily record article concerning port district commissioner miller argus publishing article concerning backer political candidates polzin helmbrecht letter editor newspaper concerning reporter financing pollution control measures following courts appeals adopted plurality opinion rosenbloom cantrell forest city publishing cert pending article concerning family members victim highly publicized bridge disaster actionable absent proof actual malice porter guam publications article concerning citizen arrest theft cash box considered event general public interest cervantes time article concerning mayor alleged organized crime connections conceded matter public general concern firestone time magazine article concerning prominent citizen use detectives electronic surveillance connection divorce davis national broadcasting supp ed la television report person caught events surrounding assassination president kennedy considered matter public interest however least one appeals faced appeal summary judgment favor publisher diversity libel suit brought philadelphia retailer expressed discomfort accepting rosenbloom plurality opinion definitive statement appropriate law gordon random house previously discussed supra latest proposed draft restatement second torts substantially reflects views rosenbloom plurality also anticipates hold strict liability defamation inconsistent provision first amendment restatement second torts tent draft apr well demise damages rules see pp merin libel wm mary rev sutherland constitutionalism america origin evolution fundamental ideas see generally levy legacy suppression freedom speech press early american history men wrote adopted first amendment steeped tradition england read blackstone classic tradition bar oracle common law minds american framers hurst growth american law law makers levy supra see also sutherland supra schick learned major means accomplishing free speech press prevent prior restraints publisher later subject legal action publication injurious blackstone commentaries see also meiklejohn first amendment absolute sup rev first framers initiated political revolution whose development still process throughout world second like revolutionaries framers foresee specific issues arise novel idea exercised domination governing activities rapidly developing nation rapidly fundamentally changing world sense framers know sense still true two centuries experience know abstract significant sense however aware adoption principle people nation set loose upon us upon world large idea still transforming men conceptions may best governed see beauharnais illinois black dissenting brant interprets framers intention liberally chafee nevertheless saw free speech protection bearing upon criticism government political speech brant bill rights chafee free speech see annals cong see also brant supra levy supra merin supra franklin example observed liberty press understood merely liberty discussing propriety public measures political opinions let us much please means liberty affronting calumniating defaming one another part willing part share legislators shall please alter law shall cheerfully consent exchange liberty abusing others privilege abus franklin writings smyth ed jefferson noted opposition public prosecutions libel government figures extend depriving private libel actions mott supra even strong suggestion favored state prosecutions hudon freedom speech press america expressions general proposition libels protected first amendment see konigsberg state bar california times film city chicago pennekamp florida cf paris adult theatre slaton stanley georgia see levy supra see abrams holmes dissenting kalven new york times case note central meaning first amendment sup rev language first amendment read barren words found dictionary symbols historic experience illumined presuppositions employed case every provision constitution crystallized nature technical concepts fact first amendment neither impairs usefulness compels paralysis living instrument dennis frankfurter concurring law defamation integral part laws england colonies since time immemorial many actions maintained judgments recovered various laws libel constitutional validity libel actions denied willing hold predecessors wrong interpretation first amendment two hundred years precedents overruled rutledge law defamation recent developments alabama lawyer prevailing libel rules country remained england commonwealth nations pedrick freedom press law libel modern revised translation cornell many years reviewing english law defamation porter committee concluded though law defamation requires modification basic principles upon founded amiss report committee law defamation cmd read correctly clearly implies publications make substantial danger reputation apparent new york times standard apply apparently true even imputation concerned conduct condition per se slander recent study comprehensively detailed role impact mass communications nation see note media first amendment free society geo example american households radio hear least one radio newscast daily yearly average home television viewing time almost six hours per day sixty years ago newspapers published daily nationwide cities competing dailies today cities served one american daily papers competing newspaper separate ownership total daily circulation passed million copies percent circulation controlled ownership groups newspaper owners profited greatly consolidation journalism industry several report yearly profits tens millions dollars tax profits ranging seven percent gross revenues unfortunately owners made profits expense public interest free expression broad base newspaper ownership narrows variation facts opinions received public antagonistic sources increasingly limited newspaper publication indeed leading american industry evolution direction press come dominated select group whose prime interest economic effect consolidation within newspaper industry magnified degree intermedia ownership cities radio station owned local daily newspaper television stations newspaper affiliations cities diversity ownership completely lacking television station newspaper control footnotes omitted held defamation plaintiff limited recovering actual injury hastens add suffice say actual injury limited loss indeed customary types actual harm inflicted defamatory falsehood include impairment reputation standing community personal humiliation mental anguish suffering ante harm resulting injury reputation difficult demonstrate may involve subtle differences conduct recipients toward plaintiff recipients witnesses able establish necessary causal connection may reluctant testify publication affected relationships plaintiff thus presumptions necessary plaintiff adequately compensated note developments law defamation harv rev questions damages judge plays important role course determine instruct jury matters may taken consideration arriving verdict since questions clearly matters substantive law judge also may frequently exercise judgment amount damages plaintiff may recover function primarily keep jury within bounds reason common sense guard excessive verdicts dictated passion prejudice see amount verdict reasonable relation plaintiff evidence loss probability loss thus trial judge may grant new trial appellate may reverse remand case new trial excessive damages frequently case remittitur may ordered effect plaintiff must accept specified reduction damages submit new trial issue liability well damages harper james law torts omitted see pedrick supra murnaghan supra note developments law defamation harv supra see cal civ code judicial review jury libel awards excessiveness influenced first amendment considerations makes little sense discard otherwise useful rule might misapplied cases holmes common law ante cf pedrick supra great many forces society operate determine extent men free fact express ideas whether privilege good faith defamatory misstatements matters public concern whether strict liability statements may greatly affect course public discussion different life heretofore followed majority rule imposing strict liability misstatements fact defaming public figures life minority good faith privilege held sway man compelled live every minute life among others whose every need thought desire fancy gratification subject public scrutiny deprived individuality human dignity individual merges mass opinions public tend never different aspirations known tend always conventionally accepted ones feelings openly exhibited tend lose quality unique personal warmth become feelings every man although sentient fungible individual bloustein privacy aspect human dignity answer dean prosser rev evisceration libel remedy private citizen removes legal arsenal effective weapon combat assault personal reputation press establishment david goliath nature relationship accentuated holding today miami herald publishing tornillo ante joined individual criticized newspaper editorial precluded first amendment requiring newspaper print reply attack case involves announced candidate public office finding first amendment barrier government intrusion function editors ante rest distinction private citizens public officials fact observes first amendment clearly protects governmental restraint exercise editorial control judgment choice material go newspaper decisions made limitations size content paper treatment public issues public officials whether fair unfair ibid emphasis added must therefore assume hapless ordinary citizen libeled press may enjoin advance publication story regardless libelous may near minnesota ex rel olson may compel newspaper print reply may force newspaper print retraction judicially compelled retraction like remedy enforceable right access entails governmental coercion content brings confrontation express provisions first amendment judicial gloss amendment developed years miami herald publishing tornillo ante cf case ante brennan dissenting brother brennan also suggests may constitutionally room possible enactment statutes requiring proof fault provide publication determination falsity plaintiff able demonstrate false statements published concerning activities ibid however even consider less drastic alternative new fault libel standards see supra democracy certainly american democracy indefinitely tolerate concentrations private power irresponsible strong enough thwart aspirations people eventually governmental power used break private power governmental power used regulate private power private power great irresponsible commission freedom press free responsible press