October - 2010
ENTERTAINMENT - TELEVISION - DEFAMATION ACTIONS
Network Television Program Risks A Defamation Action When It Presents A Statement Actually Made By A Public Figure In A Misleading Context.
In Price v. Stossel the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the District Court (lower court) erred when it dismissed a defamation action. The action was brought by televangelists against the news program “20/20.” In a clip that aired on “20/20” one of the televangelists is shown boasting about the trappings of wealth. The clip was part of a longer sermon in which the televangelist was speaking of a hypothetical person who was wealthy but spiritually unfulfilled. The news program aired only the televangelist boasting of wealth and not the context in which the remarks were made. The impression given was that the televangelist was boasting about his own wealth.
The Court of Appeals ruled that the District Court (lower court) erred by dismissing the case because the speaker’s comments were substantially true given the televangelist’s actual wealth and comments he made about his wealth in other contexts. The Court Of Appeals stated that the televangelist’s actual wealth was not the issue for the lower Court. Rather, the lower Court should have looked to the words the televangelist actually said. In this case where the comment as aired contained a material alteration of the meaning conveyed by the televangelist it is a false comment. The case was remanded (sent back to the lower court) for further consideration. The court expressed no opinion as to whether the televangelist could satisfy the remaining elements of a defamation claim.
If you would like to read the full case please email my assistant at Donnie@rosenberg- lawyer.com who will forward it to you via email.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|