November 3, 1998
DEFAMATION LAW ALERT!
The First Amendment does not protect a newspaper's
"neutral reportage" of a false, defamatory accusation
against a private figure, the California Supreme Court held
Monday (Nov. 2).
Justice Joyce Kennard, writing for a unanimous court in Khawar
v. Globe International, Inc. (no. S054868), upheld a
jury verdict against the weekly tabloid Globe for a 1989
article in which it effectively accused a Bakersfield farmer,
Khalid Khawar, of assassinating U.S. Senator Robert Kennedy. (At
the time of the assassination in June 1968, Khawar was a
Pakistani citizen and a photojournalist. His picture was taken
with Kennedy at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, shortly
before Sirhan Sirhan shot Kennedy to death there.)
The Globe claimed that its article was merely a
neutral and accurate report of allegations raised in a 1988 book.
It relied on certain federal and state court decisions, from
outside California, which have made an exception to the
common-law rule that a person who republishes a defamatory
statement is liable for libel or slander, just as the original
publisher is. The exception, called "neutral
reportage," holds that the First Amendment mandates an
absolute privilege for republication of defamatory statements in
certain circumstances. Various courts have described the required
circumstances in different ways; others have simply rejected the
neutral reportage privilege. The U.S. Supreme Court has never
tackled the issue.
"Deciding whether either the federal or the state
Constitution mandates some form of neutral reportage privilege is
a task that we leave for another day," Kennard wrote.
"Even if some form of the privilege is constitutionally
required, we are satisfied that any required privilege would not
immunize defamatory statements about private figures like
Khawar."
Kennard explained: "Only rarely will the report of false
and defamatory accusations against a person who is neither a
public official nor a public figure provide information of value
in the resolution of a controversy over a matter of public
concern. On the other hand, the report of such accusations can
have a devastating effect on the reputation of the accused
individual, who has not voluntarily elected to encounter an
increased risk of defamation and who may lack sufficient media
access to counter the accusations."
The decision should not have a significant impact on the daily
work of serious journalists in California. Although allegations
of wrongdoing by private individuals sometimes make news -- in
crime stories, for example -- those allegations are generally
covered by other privileges, such as the privilege covering
"fair and true reports" of judicial proceedings and of
complaints made to public officials (Cal. Civil Code, § 47).
* * *
© Martin Kassman 1998