Q: I am an online blog author that highlights the stories of sexual abuse victims. My most recent story highlights a known public figure as the perpetrator in an abuse scandal. The identification of the perpetrator was disclosed by the victim throughout numerous interviews, and thus included in my story. After publishing the story, I received a demand letter detailing threats of defamation from the known perpetrator. The letter states that if I don’t amend my blog post and claim it was a work of fiction I will be pursued in a court of law. Any legal advice you can lend would be greatly appreciated.
[su_button url=”https://firstamendmentcoalition.org/legal-hotline” target=”blank” style=”flat” background=”#74f60e” color=”#0b0707″ size=”5″ wide=”yes” center=”yes” radius=”0″ desc=”Click Here!” class=”div { font-size:x-small; }”]Exercise your right to know. Ask FAC’s free Legal Hotline for help![/su_button]
A: I am sorry to hear that you have received a demand letter accusing you of defamation. Whether or not a particular statement or writing is defamatory, and thus actionable in court, is necessarily fact specific. While we are unable to provide specific legal advice through this hotline service, we can provide some general background information on defamation law that you might find helpful.
Defamation, which is also sometimes referred to as libel or slander, is the general term for a legal claim involving injury to one’s reputation caused by a false statement of fact. In general, statements of fact, as well statements that are opinion, cannot support a defamation claim. The crux of a defamation claim is falsity. Therefore, truth is one of the primary defenses to a defamation claim because truthful statements that harm another’s reputation will not create liability for defamation.
There are additional defenses as well, including statements that are purely opinion and statements protected by some qualified or absolute privilege. For example, statements made to the police or included in a police report, as well as statements made in court, are among those that might be privileged. Thus, if the victim you interviewed told the same story to the police, your blog post may be privileged as well.
Based on your inquiry, it also appears that the perpetrator, the person you wrote about, and the potential plaintiff in any lawsuit against you, could be considered a public figure.
When it comes to defamation, there is a higher standard for public figures. In contrast to private plaintiffs, who only need to demonstrate that a defendant acted negligently when saying or publishing a defamatory statement, public officials and figures must demonstrate that a defendant acted with actual malice in order to prevail in a defamation action. New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 283 (1964). Actual malice requires either proof that you knew the statement was false, or that you published it with reckless disregard for the truth.
Furthermore, a defamation lawsuit may also be subject to an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motion to strike, which provides defendants in these situations with a procedural tool to dismiss meritless lawsuits that attempt to suppress protected speech. Defendants who are successful in bringing anti-SLAPP motions can recover their attorney’s fees from the plaintiff.
Unfortunately, we do not have the resources at the FAC to provide representation to individuals. I would encourage you, however, to seek out an attorney specializing in defamation. An organization that might be able to help you with a referral to an attorney specializing in defamation law is the Media Law Resource Center, which can be reached at (212) 337-0200. Finally, you can also try reaching out to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that defends civil liberties in the digital world, including defending the rights of bloggers. If they can’t help you directly, they may also be able to refer you to an attorney.
Bryan Cave LLP is general counsel for the First Amendment Coalition and responds to FAC hotline inquiries. In responding to these inquiries, we can give general information regarding open government and speech issues but cannot provide specific legal advice or representation.