Want to get famous real quick? Here’s an idea: Become an arrogant, celebrity-crazed jerk and let your personality shine through your writing. Hey, it worked for Mario Armando Lavandeira Jr., whose alter ego, Perez Hilton, maintains a website dedicated to keeping fans aware of every last scandal or triumph that goes on in the world of celebrities.
Perez, the self proclaimed Queen of all media, has landed himself in hot water many times with the sarcastic and nasty comments he publishes, but his defamatory statements have never led to a conviction of libel. Here’s why:
Although Perez’s posts meet the five requirements for libel: publication, identification, defamation, injury and fault, for the most part Perez’s posts are not considered libelous because they concern public figures.
Public figures have a much more difficult time proving libel because in addition to the five libel requirements, the figure has to prove “actual malice,” which means that “the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth,” according to expertlaw.com.
An example of this would be Perez’s distaste for Mischa Barton. On numerous occasions he has trash-talked her acting skills and made fun of her cellulite-covered thighs, which have earned her the lovely moniker Mushy Fartone, but she cannot sue for libel because the statements, although malicious, are true.
Another example is DJ (and girlfriend of Lindsay Lohan), Samantha Ronson. She “filed a defamation lawsuit against Perez in July after he accused her of being responsible for the cocaine found in Lohan’s car following her first arrest for driving under the influence,” according to popcrunch.com, but had her case dismissed because it was considered “an unfair attempt to stifle [Perez’s] right of free speech,” according to thehollywoodgossip.com.
It is also hard to prove actual malice in this case because Perez could easily say that he honestly thought that the cocaine belonged to Ronson.
So, to all of you out there shaking in your seats at the idea of a future libel lawsuit, follow Perez's lead and only write cruel comments about celebrities. The court will surely protect you.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Teasing Correctly
We’ve been talking in class a lot about other things on a newspaper page other than blocks of text. Generally, I’m interested in photos and how images are incorporated into a story with overheads and cutlines, but my eyes have been distracted by other graphics.
Lately, the Red and Black has been doing something with their nameplate that can either be hit or miss. I’ve noticed the use of teasers in the nameplate of the Red and Black lately and sometimes it’s confusing. In our Harrower textbook, when defining teaser, it says:
“Teasers – these promote the best stories inside the paper (also called promos or skyboxes).”
In the March 5, 2009 issue of the Red and Black, the teaser included little cutouts of flowers and a little blurb about orchids at the Atlanta Botanical Gardens, on page three. Well, when you turned to page three, the orchid story was actually part of a larger package promoting things around Athens happening during spring break.
I understand why a teaser was used, but I’m not sure why it was just of the orchids of the Botanical Gardens. If they wanted to promote the package, which made use of a great deal of graphics, why not pull something from that to promote the actual story? I had wondered if there was actually a whole story about orchids, but I turned to the page and saw this:
There was a great opportunity to mimic this recognizable graphic as the teaser, but it wasn't used.
Today’s issue correctly uses a teaser in the nameplate. Today the movie adaptation of the famous Watchmen comic hits theaters and it, especially with the college crowd, will probably be a big hit. The article itself is very interesting and provides a lot of information about the film and the skepticism surrounding it. So on today’s Red and Black nameplate, two characters sit on either side and a correct lead into the story is given. This teaser is far less misleading.
As for whether or not I like the visual of a teaser, I'm undecided. However, if used correctly, teasers are a great tool for pulling a reader into the paper to read other stories that aren't front page material.
Lately, the Red and Black has been doing something with their nameplate that can either be hit or miss. I’ve noticed the use of teasers in the nameplate of the Red and Black lately and sometimes it’s confusing. In our Harrower textbook, when defining teaser, it says:
“Teasers – these promote the best stories inside the paper (also called promos or skyboxes).”
In the March 5, 2009 issue of the Red and Black, the teaser included little cutouts of flowers and a little blurb about orchids at the Atlanta Botanical Gardens, on page three. Well, when you turned to page three, the orchid story was actually part of a larger package promoting things around Athens happening during spring break.
I understand why a teaser was used, but I’m not sure why it was just of the orchids of the Botanical Gardens. If they wanted to promote the package, which made use of a great deal of graphics, why not pull something from that to promote the actual story? I had wondered if there was actually a whole story about orchids, but I turned to the page and saw this:
There was a great opportunity to mimic this recognizable graphic as the teaser, but it wasn't used.
Today’s issue correctly uses a teaser in the nameplate. Today the movie adaptation of the famous Watchmen comic hits theaters and it, especially with the college crowd, will probably be a big hit. The article itself is very interesting and provides a lot of information about the film and the skepticism surrounding it. So on today’s Red and Black nameplate, two characters sit on either side and a correct lead into the story is given. This teaser is far less misleading.
As for whether or not I like the visual of a teaser, I'm undecided. However, if used correctly, teasers are a great tool for pulling a reader into the paper to read other stories that aren't front page material.
Misleading Statistics
In order to talk about libel, I decided to search through the pages of my hometown newspaper, the Macon Telegraph. While, I didn’t exactly find a libel issue to discus, I was able to find an article dealing with child abductions that could be very misleading. The article discusses a mock abduction training exercise being carried out by a group of Georgia law enforcement agencies. However, the first few graphs are used to give background information about child abductions. The lead, “On average, a child is reported missing every 40 seconds, according to the AmberWatch Foundation,” is a great way to spark reader interest, but I went to the AmberWatch Foundation’s Web site and that statistic is part of a counter on top of the homepage. The counter will specify the number of children reported missing since you have arrived to the site and it clearly states that the source of the statistics is a study conducted by the Office of Juvenile Justice. In my opinion, that statistic was incorrectly attributed. Aside from that fact, the article deals with a child abduction training exercise. Child abductions are very different from a child being reported missing. I ran away from home like six times as a kid. Just because a child is missing does not mean that he or she has been abducted. I also had a problem with a quote that the journalist used from a spokeswoman for the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office. “Statistics show 44 percent die within the first hour, 74 percent within the first three hours, 91 percent within 24 hours and 99 percent within the first week.” If I were going to use that quote I would ask the woman from where the numbers came. Personally, I don’t buy it. It isn’t clear if the quote is talking about the number of children abducted or merely reported missing. Certainly, 44 percent of children reported missing do not die within the first hour. The numbers must be dealing with child abductions, but even so, the figures are a stretch and I would certainly like to find the source. I found interesting article when searching for statistics dealing with missing children in Slate. The Slate article says that officials total the number of reported cases from different categories (family abduction, nonfamily abduction, runaways, throwaways (abandoned children) and, “When the categories get conflated, the statistics can become confusing.” In fact the article says that in 2007, according to one study, out of 800,000 cases only 115 were “stereotypical kidnappings .” I guess by now I am just harping on the ability to lie with statistics, but my point is that if I were the journalist I would have researched those figures more closely.
Not exactly libel, but grammar is certainly given a bad name.
This Red& Black article doesn’t provide an example of libel, but it certainly pertains to false accusation. The end of the article will, however, make you think about the ramifications of getting involved in a libel (or in this case, invasion of privacy) suit as a reporter. I feel for the AJC reporter involved in this one.
First off, I would like to publicly contest the Red & Black’s chronic capitalization of the word, “University,” in their articles. I’m fairly sure they have come up with some kind of rationalization, but I just don’t understand this blatant disregard for AP style.
As for grammar, I think there should be a comma after the word, “harassment,” in the following sentence since it starts an independent clause. ‘"Dr. Soloski has always contended that he's been falsely accused of sexual harassment and again, today, we have learned that this is what occurred," said Brandon Hornsby….’ I’m not completely sure about this one, and I know throwing a lot of commas close together will look odd. However, I think that would be more correct.
I have another comma issue in the following sentence. ‘"The case was always not just about clearing his name, but making sure no one at the University was subject to false accusations.”’ Here, I don’t think there should be a comma after the word “name.” Can you tell I have a thing for punctuation?
It doesn’t stop there. I want to see a comma in this sentence as well: "It was a 70-page order and there were 12 main points in the case." I realize I might be a bit picky when dealing with commas, but am I wrong? I’m actually starting to worry that I’m seeing things.
The last sentence of that particular paragraph also needs some work. There is a comma missing, and there are just too many clauses. The sentence should have been broken up to avoid confusion.
After being a little brutal, I will say that wording is always tricky when you have to use legal jargon in an article.
First off, I would like to publicly contest the Red & Black’s chronic capitalization of the word, “University,” in their articles. I’m fairly sure they have come up with some kind of rationalization, but I just don’t understand this blatant disregard for AP style.
As for grammar, I think there should be a comma after the word, “harassment,” in the following sentence since it starts an independent clause. ‘"Dr. Soloski has always contended that he's been falsely accused of sexual harassment and again, today, we have learned that this is what occurred," said Brandon Hornsby….’ I’m not completely sure about this one, and I know throwing a lot of commas close together will look odd. However, I think that would be more correct.
I have another comma issue in the following sentence. ‘"The case was always not just about clearing his name, but making sure no one at the University was subject to false accusations.”’ Here, I don’t think there should be a comma after the word “name.” Can you tell I have a thing for punctuation?
It doesn’t stop there. I want to see a comma in this sentence as well: "It was a 70-page order and there were 12 main points in the case." I realize I might be a bit picky when dealing with commas, but am I wrong? I’m actually starting to worry that I’m seeing things.
The last sentence of that particular paragraph also needs some work. There is a comma missing, and there are just too many clauses. The sentence should have been broken up to avoid confusion.
After being a little brutal, I will say that wording is always tricky when you have to use legal jargon in an article.
Corrections prove hard to find on newspaper Web sites
One of the principal ways newspapers avoid libel suits is by publishing a correction, or apology, of sorts in a subsequent issue. As newspaper readership has migrated from hard copies to online, finding the corrections section seems to have gotten much more difficult. A section that is almost always prominently featured in the "A" section of a newspaper is often buried in the online edition.
To start with, let's take the New York Times, one of the nation's largest newspapers. Upon typing "corrections" into the search box at the top of the page, the first result is indeed the daily corrections article. However, for the casual reader who is not specifically looking for what may have been misreported, the corrections section is not as prominent as it is in the hard copy of the newspaper. A link to the section appears about halfway down the home page on the left side in very small font.
In the AJC, corrections appear on page two of the newspaper's hard copy on a daily basis. On the newspaper's Web site, however, a link to the corrections section does not appear. Additionally, a link to the section is not available via any of the headings at the top of the page either. Only by typing "corrections" into the search box was I able to find corrections, and they did not appear to be in any particular order.
Corrections, once a crucial part of a newspaper saving its reputation, have taken a back seat as newspapers have gone online. Providing the public with 100 percent correct information should be the number one priority of a publication. Consequently, I believe corrections should appear on a daily basis on the front page of every publication's Web site, rather than taking an "out of site, out of mind" approach.
To start with, let's take the New York Times, one of the nation's largest newspapers. Upon typing "corrections" into the search box at the top of the page, the first result is indeed the daily corrections article. However, for the casual reader who is not specifically looking for what may have been misreported, the corrections section is not as prominent as it is in the hard copy of the newspaper. A link to the section appears about halfway down the home page on the left side in very small font.
In the AJC, corrections appear on page two of the newspaper's hard copy on a daily basis. On the newspaper's Web site, however, a link to the corrections section does not appear. Additionally, a link to the section is not available via any of the headings at the top of the page either. Only by typing "corrections" into the search box was I able to find corrections, and they did not appear to be in any particular order.
Corrections, once a crucial part of a newspaper saving its reputation, have taken a back seat as newspapers have gone online. Providing the public with 100 percent correct information should be the number one priority of a publication. Consequently, I believe corrections should appear on a daily basis on the front page of every publication's Web site, rather than taking an "out of site, out of mind" approach.
Libel in the Classifieds: Disney Star an Escort?
With the popularity and influence of Disney teens like Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers, the above question easily gets anyone’s attention. That is why Brenda Song sued an escort service that used her photo in personal ads that appeared in L.A. Weekly in April 2008.
The ad featured Song’s—aka “Layla’s”— image with a phone number and tagline that said “Come get lei’d.” According to a more elaborate article on E! Online news, Song’s lawyer actually called the number and was promised a meeting with the girl in the image. Vibe Media Inc. is the company responsible for the ad.
Song sued the company and its owner, Ali Askari, for $100,000 charging “libel, intentional infliction of emotional distress and commercial misappropriation of her photo and likeness.” The lawsuit was revised when Vanessa Sena was found to be responsible for creating the ad. The ad was actually for Cityvibe.com, an escort service and subsidiary of Vibe Media Inc.
This photo from The Insider shows the ad side-by-side with a picture of Song easily found on the internet
On March 5, the final judgment required Sena to pay Song $16,000 for the harm done by the ad and to write a personal letter of apology. If both actions are not done by December 1, Sena will have to pay $100,000.
The article itself is very straightforward and uses an inverted pyramid format. This type of writing is typical and effective for online news sites that attract readers who quickly browse for interesting stories.
This case is a great example of how harmful libel can truly be. The influence these Disney stars have is astounding; moreover, the possibility of children viewing a role model in this light is not acceptable. Thankfully, Star's representatives caught the ad and justice was served.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
S.C. Target Store in Libel Suit over $100 Bill
This article in Greenville Online is about a woman in Greer, S.C., who is in a libel and negligence suit with Target for $3.1 million after an employee in the store falsely accused her of attempting to use a counterfeit bill.
After Rita Cantrell was stopped in Target for her 1974 edition $100 bill, the Target employee who appraoched her sent out an e-mail to other businesses in several states, warning them to be on the lookout for Cantrell. Cantrell was later arrested at her workplace.
The information in the article is somewhat scattered. It starts with the inverted pyramid format, then loses its shape after the second graph, in which it tells what happened. The third graph is about the money that Cantrell is getting as a percentage of Target’s worth, and then the fourth goes back to the trial.
The information about the percentage of money relative to each sides’ worth is repeated again in graph 13: “Wilkin argued the jury…,” and summarized yet again in a quote in graph 16: “Wilkins argued that the award was a ‘mere fraction…’ “
Graph 17 might be a libel case in itself. It is a quote, although not a direct quote, by Cantrell’s lawyer which states that “Target failed to properly train and appropriately place its employees…”
Finally, the last sentence of the article is a quote, and one that needs a conclusion, or a reaction, or something to give it some closure: “‘Frankly, I’m surprised, your honor, that the punitive damage award wasn’t higher,’ he said.” I had to scroll, and was disappointed and unsatisfied when I realized that was the end.
After Rita Cantrell was stopped in Target for her 1974 edition $100 bill, the Target employee who appraoched her sent out an e-mail to other businesses in several states, warning them to be on the lookout for Cantrell. Cantrell was later arrested at her workplace.
The information in the article is somewhat scattered. It starts with the inverted pyramid format, then loses its shape after the second graph, in which it tells what happened. The third graph is about the money that Cantrell is getting as a percentage of Target’s worth, and then the fourth goes back to the trial.
The information about the percentage of money relative to each sides’ worth is repeated again in graph 13: “Wilkin argued the jury…,” and summarized yet again in a quote in graph 16: “Wilkins argued that the award was a ‘mere fraction…’ “
Graph 17 might be a libel case in itself. It is a quote, although not a direct quote, by Cantrell’s lawyer which states that “Target failed to properly train and appropriately place its employees…”
Finally, the last sentence of the article is a quote, and one that needs a conclusion, or a reaction, or something to give it some closure: “‘Frankly, I’m surprised, your honor, that the punitive damage award wasn’t higher,’ he said.” I had to scroll, and was disappointed and unsatisfied when I realized that was the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)