Slander

Definition

Slander refers to the act of making false spoken statements that damage someone's reputation. This form of defamation is significant because it highlights the delicate balance between protecting individual rights and ensuring public interest, particularly in journalism. Slander not only affects the person being spoken about but also raises important questions regarding freedom of speech and the responsibilities of those who disseminate information.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Slander must be proven to be false; if the statement is true, it is not considered slander, regardless of its impact on reputation.
2. The burden of proof usually lies with the person claiming slander, meaning they must show that the statements made were false and damaging.
3. Public figures face a higher standard in slander cases because they must demonstrate 'actual malice'—that the speaker knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
4. In many jurisdictions, slander cases can be more difficult to win than libel cases since slander typically requires the plaintiff to show specific damages.
5. Certain types of statements, like those about criminal behavior or professional incompetence, are often treated as slander per se, meaning damages are presumed.

Review Questions

• How does slander relate to the concepts of freedom of speech and individual rights?
  • Slander brings into focus the tension between freedom of speech and the protection of individual rights. While individuals have the right to express their opinions, this right can be limited when such expressions involve false statements that damage someone else's reputation. The challenge lies in ensuring that free speech is upheld while also providing remedies for those harmed by slanderous statements. Journalists, in particular, must navigate this balance carefully as they report on public interest issues.
• What distinguishes slander from libel in terms of legal implications and proof requirements?
  • The primary distinction between slander and libel lies in their forms; slander pertains to spoken defamatory statements, while libel involves written statements. Legally, proving slander can be more complex because the claimant often needs to demonstrate specific damages resulting from the statement. In contrast, libel may not require proof of damages if the statement falls into certain categories deemed harmful by law. Both forms of defamation require a demonstration of falsity, but public figures face a tougher challenge in proving actual malice in both cases.
• Evaluate how the legal standards for proving slander have evolved over time and their impact on journalistic practices.
  • The legal standards for proving slander have evolved significantly, particularly with landmark cases that defined the need for public figures to prove actual malice. This evolution has influenced journalistic practices by imposing a higher burden on reporters when discussing prominent individuals. Journalists must ensure accuracy and fairness in their reporting to avoid potential legal repercussions while also being aware of the potential chilling effect this can have on free expression. Consequently, media outlets often implement rigorous fact-checking protocols and prioritize responsible reporting to navigate these complexities.

Related terms

Libel:

Libel is a form of defamation that involves making false written statements that harm a person's reputation.

Defamation:

Defamation is the broader term that encompasses both slander and libel, referring to any false communication that injures a person's reputation.

Public Figure: A public figure is someone who has achieved fame or notoriety, which often means they must meet a higher standard to prove slander or libel claims.