Libel-Proof Your Writing (ePub)

This is an untraditional book about libel. It is not primarily about libel law, nor about all the defenses that body of law provides. Rather, it is about how to spot and remove libelous statements before they are published - in print or on the Internet - or broadcast or even Tweeted or posted on Facebook. It is intended primarily for journalists and journalism students, not for the lawyers who defend libel suits nor for law students. It focuses primarily on the craft of reporting, writing and editing and how practitioners of that craft can avoid making libelous statements. It deals only secondarily with the defenses that are available to journal-ists and their employers who inadvertently publish or broadcast false information. Avoiding libel is, in many ways, similar to crossing a busy street safely. The pedestrian has to look both ways to see what's coming. The journalist has to look both ways to see who is making an assertion that is about to be distributed, whether in print, over the air or, increasingly, on the Web. If the answer is no one, it is the journalist, and his or her employer, who is stating the claim as a fact, often with-out meaning to do so. Here is a real-life example of what can go wrong when a writer fails to put serious charges in the mouth of whoever uttered them. A real estate appraiser in Monroe, N.Y. was examining a house a few years ago when he discovered five feet of water in the basement. The mortgage broker arranging a refi-nancing asked Updecrick to pre-tend that it wasn't there. Who said the mortgage broker told the appraiser to lie? Look around. It's not the appraiser. It's not anyone. So it must be the newspaper, stating this as a fact. The repair job is simple. It is to make the invisible appear visible. Some-one (very likely the appraiser) said that the broker asked the appraiser to ignore the water. It's the reporter's job to name that someone, so that the claim has a foundation. That is not a bulletproof solution. Publishing a false statement made by someone else may expose the publisher to liabil-ity. But attributing a claim like this to someone would go a long way toward negating what a plaintiff would have to prove to hold the publisher liable. Making the writer think about the attribution may also push him or her to question the underlying assertion. If it's a provable fact, that's the best defense there is to a libel claim. As the lawyers say, truth is the ultimate defense. If, on the other hand, the statement is dubious, thinking about the need for attribution may lead the writer or editor to think about the necessity - or even the fairness - of using it, or eliminating or hedging it. In the appraiser example, for instance, little would be lost by changing "e;the mortgage broker arranging a refinancing asked him to pretend that it wasn't there,"e; to "e;someone who wanted to see a transaction go through asked him to pretend that it wasn't there."e; The point is still made, but without the finger-pointing. That's the good news. The bad news is that bloggers and other Web journalists, typically with much less of a support structure, need to review their own work carefully, even if it takes a precious few minutes. For them, knowl-edge about what to look for, and how to repair it, becomes more important than it ever was.