5 Common Legal Challenges Journalists Face Today
By: Bethany Sarah
Tags: Journalism, News, Law, Tips And Tricks, Advice

5 Common Legal Challenges Journalists Face Today

I have pulled together a short list covering 5 of the most common legal challenges journalists are facing today to ‘lay down the laws of the land’ if you will and a few tips along the way to keep you out of hot water. Bethany Sarah Dec 8, 2020·4 min read

When it comes to journalism, at the heart of everything you write there is the underlying value of ‘freedom of expression’.

This makes its way into every aspect of the job and sometimes provides a strong argument for the journalistic choices you make. But in many cases the freedom of expression will only carry you so far and that is what this blog post will discuss.

1. Defamation/Libel

A libellous statement is any method of signifying meaning which causes damage. For example: words, pictures or gestures etc. These statements are considered defamatory IF they cause harm to the reputation of a body that trades for profit and/or is likely to cause serious financial loss.

The defamation act (2013) is a huge topic of conversation and has many layers but to put it simply the act is enforced to stop harm. It explains that even if what you are reporting is entirely factual and has proof if it causes damage to the individual in question or their livelihood it is classed as defamatory and can result in a legal nightmare.

To avoid this legal headache, live your journalistic life by this rule:

read your copy, read it again with great sensitivity, and then change it.

2. Copyright

Copyright law protects the products of people’s skill, creativity, labour or time and breaks down into two main categories:

o Authorial/primary works — Literary, dramatic, musical and artistic

o Entrepreneurial/Derivative/Secondary works — Sound recordings, films, broadcasts, cable programmes, typographical works

As a journalist it’s important to know the following things:

Just because its online does not mean its ‘free’ becoming familiar with royalty free image site such as Pixabay and Pexels is crucial for avoiding any copyright law infringement.

The Fair dealing defence does NOT apply to images, it only covers you for the use of small extracts from an acknowledged source for the purpose of reporting current events.

3. Malicious falsehood

Malicious falsehood describes publications that cause material financial harm to any business through sharing knowingly false (not necessarily defamatory) information.

In simple terms — bold faced lies.

Journalism can be a testing industry to work in, there is a constant demand for news and the pressure of competition. As evidenced by the copious amounts of negative headlines; bad news sells. Although it may be hard to believe, sometimes bad news can be hard to find. And there lies malicious falsehood — the temptation to alter a chain of events ever so slightly to fit a brief of bad news.

e.g., ‘The Script are calling it quits’

This has no truth to it at all but would not cause any damage to the band. It would arguably drive more attention to them. Due to this it is considered malicious falsehood.

4. Human Rights Act 1998

The Human Rights Act 1998 presents the trouble task of balancing the freedom of expression with the right to respect for privacy. This becomes very prominent when journalists cover ‘elite’ sources such as celebrities. To help you find that balance consider the following things:

o Are you in a private place? (where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy)

o If you are taking photos of individuals — do you have permission?

o Does it meet the needs of public interest?

5. Publishing on social media

Social media can lull us all into a false sense of consciousness especially when it comes to the power of our words. Constructing a short tweet about something you read or a sharp throwaway comment you post on Facebook in the heat of the moment can very quickly land you in hot water. Journalists today have to consider social media as a tool to reach new and wider audiences but also as a potential trap. There have been cases of celebrities sharing defamatory statements, innuendos or jigsaw identifications which have resulted in big legal bills.

Q u i c k T i p s :

o Think before you tweet — although a simple statement this could save a lot of trouble. Refer back to the ‘golden rule’ put yourself in a sensitive person’s shoes and look for the issues in your statement

o Don’t play ‘hide and seek’ — avoid speaking indirectly about someone or something; you may not be as indirect as you think and it’s really not worth the risk.

o If you aren’t a judge don’t make a ruling — it is very tempting to put your two pence in on a hot legal debate or individual who’s fallen into the spotlight for a crime but adopt the line ‘innocent until proven guilty’. You may only be one tweet away from contempt; don’t risk it.

What are your thoughts on these restrictions?

Is there an argument to be had that they are perhaps too restrictive?