TITLE

Experimental Test of Some Notions of The Fact/Opinion Distinction in Libel

AUTHOR(S)
Cohen, Jeremy; Mutz, Diana; Nass, Clifford; Mason, Laurie
PUB. DATE
March 1989
SOURCE
Journalism Quarterly;Spring89, Vol. 66 Issue 1, p11
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Presents an experimental test of some notions of the fact and opinion distinction in libel. Assessment of common law protection; Investigation of libel suit; Examination of the perception of fact versus opinion on reader assessment of the defamed person.
ACCESSION #
14806354

 

Related Articles

  • Through a lens, darkly. Callahan, Sean // Columbia Journalism Review;Nov/Dec1983, Vol. 22 Issue 4, p71 

    Reviews the book "DelCorso's Gallery," by Philip Caputo.

  • MALICE, QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE, AND THE NEW RESPONSIBLE COMMUNICATION DEFENCE TO DEFAMATION: WHICH WAY FORWARD FOR INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IN CANADA? Lim, Eugene C. // University of British Columbia Law Review;Jan2012, Vol. 45 Issue 1, p223 

    An essay is presented which focuses on the common law tort of defamation resulted in several cases of the Supreme Court of Canada including Grant v. Torstar Corp, Quan v. Cusson, and Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Ltd. It was determined that "responsible communication" defence to the law should be...

  • The Reason Behind Name, Rank and Serial Number: When are Employers Afforded Immunity for Statements Made About Employees? Feldman, Scott B. // Venulex Legal Summaries;2005 Q4, p1 

    The article discusses the human resource practice of giving limited information about employees by employers. Most employers only give out employee's name, job classification and salary to third party inquiries because they may be sued for defamation. An employer's defense against claims for...

  • Defamation: time limits reduced.  // Accountancy;Mar1986, Vol. 97 Issue 1111, p30 

    Reports that the 57th section of the Administration of Justice Act of 1985 in Great Britain changes the time limits for actions for libel and slander. Reduction from six to three years from publication.

  • ONLY IN AMERICA (Cont'd).  // Fortune;12/27/1993, Vol. 128 Issue 16, p141 

    An excerpt from an article published in the "Wall Street Journal" is presented.

  • Owner Not Liable for Defamation Against Former Resident.  // Apartment Building Management Insider;2009, Vol. 23 Issue 13, p5 

    The article discusses a court case wherein a former resident sued the owner and property manager of the apartment that he formerly rented for defamation.

  • Judge throws out suit against editor.  // Advocate;7/8/70, Vol. 4 Issue 10, p22 

    Reports on the dismissal of a complaint of criminal defamation filed by a police official against the editor of the periodical 'Mattachine Midwest,' in Chicago, Illinois. Reason for filing the complaint; Grounds on which the case was dismissed.

  • Takeover panel 'privileged'. Kobrin, David // Accountancy;Feb1981, Vol. 92 Issue 1050, p96 

    Discusses a High Court in Great Britain's ruling on the libel case of Graff v Panel on Takeovers and Mergers. Case background; Upholding of the Takeover Panel's defense of qualified privilege.

  • NO NAME IS NO DEFENCE. Chandler, Ainslie // BRW;3/11/2010, Vol. 32 Issue 9, p55 

    The article discusses a court case wherein defamation actions were filed against three contributors of the HotCopper investment website by DataMotion Asia Pacific after comments made about the firm's managing director Ronald Moir in Australia.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of NEW JERSEY STATE LIBRARY

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics