1)
This is a three part question: a) How do courts apply the "Assumption
of Risk" legal theory to claims that you were misquoted in media
interviews? b) How do courts expect you to control media misquotes? c)
Name a leading Supreme Court case regarding the issue of misquotes?
a)
In a media context, "assumption of risk" is an affirmative defense
used by a defendant (e.g. news media outlet) in a negligence suit whereby
a plaintiff (e.g. spokesperson) claims he or she was misquoted.
Under this defense the news media outlet will claim that a spokesperson
should have enough foresight to know the media edits interviews.
Therefore, every time a spokesperson conducts a media interview, there
is the risk of being misquoted. If successful the "assumption
of risk" defense would relieve the news media outlet of legal responsibility
for any resulting injury of the media interview.
b)
Courts expect spokespeople to be trained on how to handle leading questions,
and understand the new taping laws of media interviews.
c)
A leading Supreme Court case regarding misquotes is Masson v. New Yorker
Magazine 501 U.S. 496 (1991).
2)
Under the new privacy laws, what is your liability for conducting media
interviews in your office?
It
is negligent for anyone to conduct a news interview in your office because
there is a heightened risk that confidential materials or personal items
will be in plain view of a news person. Additionally, if conversations
from other employees are overheard in your office, you will be held negligent.
Courts reject claims of invasion of privacy when a spokesperson invites
the harm.
3)
In libel claims courts view public officials/figures differently from
private people. What is the main difference according to the landmark
cases New York Times v. Sullivan 376 U.S. 254 (1964) and Gertz v.
Welch 418 U.S. 323 (1974)?
Since
a public official/figure has greater access to the media than a private
person, the public official has a higher duty of care. In a libel
case a private person only needs to prove the defendant was negligent
or at fault. However, under New York Times v. Sullivan and Gertz v. Welch,
a public official must prove actual malice. Actual malice means
that the statement was made with knowledge that it was false or reckless
disregard of whether it was false or not.
4)
How does the Supreme Court define media access? Can you name at
least five public properties that are considered non-public forums?
Under
United States v. Grace 461 U.S. 171 (1983) and Adderley v. Florida 385
U.S. 39 (1966), the Supreme Court places limitations on media access.
Five public properties that fall under the category of non-public forums
are as follows: (1) City Halls; (2) Public Schools; (3) Government Offices;
(4) Courts; (5)
Jails
5)
How does the United States Supreme Court ruling in Milkovich v. Lorain
Journal Co 497 U.S. 1, impact your media interviews?
The
Milkovich case has a direct impact on your media interviews. According
to Milkovich, opinions are not always protected speech. Many of
your opinions may end up in front of a jury as factual assertions.
6)
Name the six core elements of libel?
The
six core elements of libel are: (1) Defamatory Communication; (2) Publication;
(3) Falsity; (4) Identification; (5) Harm; (6) Fault
7)
How do today's courts view your right of privacy at home?
Due
to the growth of virtual offices, the home is now considered the extended
workplace. Courts have outlined specific steps that must be taken
to claim an expectation of privacy at home.
Join
Me At An Upcoming Guardian Series Seminar.
Having trained
thousands and thousands of employees, I regularly witness the power of
my workplace communication seminars. Investing in The Guardian Series
off-site training has other great benefits for attendees and their companies.
- Designed for learning. Visual and
audio cues are incorporated along with targeted handouts for better
learning and greater retention.
- No distractions. The phone isn’t
ringing and peers aren’t standing in line with “problems.”
- Ask questions. You get a chance to
ask those burning questions from an expert.
- Train-the-trainer. Attendees will
be ready to share the knowledge acquired during my seminar.
- Networking. Meet and greet local
businesspeople and learn how they are handling issues.
- Concentrated information. After hundreds
of seminars and hours of research, you’ll learn practical solutions
based on the newest electronic privacy and liability laws.
Click
Here For Details On The Guardian Series: Seminars.
Here’s
What Others Have Said About The Guardian Series Seminars:
| “This course
was very informative and provided a fresh perspective."
|
William
Schwartz, PIO, Miami Police Department, FL
|
| |
| “Thanks for
taking the blindfold off. This course should be required at the academy
level and each time a police officer is promoted. ”
|
Fernando
Flores, IL Central Mgmt. Services |
| |
| “This presentation was no-nonsense.
The most important strategies for me were the interviewing techniques
on controlling leading or aggressive questions. Having someone
with a legal and media background was very informative.” |
Captain James Tesh, Winston Salem
, NC |
|
