NCJ Number
116046
Journal
ABA Journal Volume: 75 Dated: (March 1989) Pages: 52-56,58
Date Published
1989
Length
6 pages
Annotation
In two recent libel cases, involving suits against Penthouse and Hustler magazines by Miss Wyoming, Kim Pring, and Jerry Falwell, the courts overturned damage rewards in favor of the priority of first amendment rights of the press.
Abstract
In the Pring case, the court held that Pring could only be libeled by fact and not by fantasy and, therefore, was entitled to nothing. In this decision, the court denied Pring's right to her good name, her peace and privacy, and to recovery from the pain and humiliation in favor of Penthouse's right to parody. Similarly, in the Falwell case, the court's decision suggests that the right of the press to inflict personal injury is more important than the right to be protected from it. Ever since the landmark decision in New York Times vs. Sullivan, the media has focused public attention on the first amendment. It has demanded and received the right to disseminate every variety of falsehood to the public so long as malice could not be proved. Before New York Times vs. Sullivan, States were permitted to set the limits of abuse to which their citizens might be subjected. If the media defamed the reputation or besmirched the professional competence of citizens, they could obtain justice. Truthfulness was the framework that protected the media from liability and the public from false information. These recent decisions suggest a need for reconsideration of how the rights of the public and its citizens and the media might be better balanced. Illustrations.