An Unreasonable Standard?: The Dilemma of Applying Actual Malice to Irrational Speakers

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2023-06-15 DOI:10.1080/10811680.2023.2216192

Eric P. Robinson

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Several defamation cases stemming from apparently irrational statements are testing the boundaries and standards of defamation law. The constitutional standard for defamation of public figures, actual malice, is based on the speaker’s knowledge that a statement is false or their reckless disregard for whether it is true. An irrational speaker who believes their statement is true confounds this test. This article delineates aspects of defamation law that are challenged by an irrational speaker and concludes with a recommendation to include a stronger “objective” element in the application of the actual malice standard to such cases.

查看原文本刊更多论文

不合理的标准？：对非理性演讲者使用实际恶意的困境

摘要几起由明显不合理的言论引发的诽谤案件正在考验诽谤法的界限和标准。诽谤公众人物的宪法标准，即实际恶意，是基于发言人知道一项声明是虚假的，或者他们不顾事实是否属实。一个非理性的演讲者认为他们的陈述是真实的，这就混淆了这个测试。这篇文章描述了诽谤法中受到非理性发言人质疑的方面，并建议在对此类案件适用实际恶意标准时加入更有力的“客观”因素。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Communication Law and Policy LAW-

CiteScore

0.60

自引率

33.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The societal, cultural, economic and political dimensions of communication, including the freedoms of speech and press, are undergoing dramatic global changes. The convergence of the mass media, telecommunications, and computers has raised important questions reflected in analyses of modern communication law, policy, and regulation. Serving as a forum for discussions of these continuing and emerging questions, Communication Law and Policy considers traditional and contemporary problems of freedom of expression and dissemination, including theoretical, conceptual and methodological issues inherent in the special conditions presented by new media and information technologies.