Kelsey Baker

Com. 440
2/3/2014
Assignment #2
1. From my assertions Justin Bieber could easily prove the first four
elements of libel against the reporter and Gossip.com for accusations
included in the first publication. Since the allegations were posted by a
news source on a public forum (the internet) theres clearly proof of
publication, as online publications are treated equivalently to those in
print. Gossip.com also identifies Bieber by explicitly stating his name in
relation to the accusations in both the first and second publication. In
regards to the first post about Bieber drinking, drugging and being out
of control these statements are defamatory because they indicate
illegal and unethical behavior. The claims made about Biebers
daughter are not defamatory as they are not false or embarrassing.
Assuming that Bieber can prove he was sick (and not drunk or high) it
should be easy to substantiate these statements as fault.
2. Justin Bieber would be classified as an all-purpose public figure in
this lawsuit. As a (clearly) popular performer he is a prominent figure in
society and has a large influence on the public. Bieber does not work
for the government, which indicates he is not a public figure. Also,
there was no controversy prior to the publication of this article, and
Bieber did not voluntarily participate in the issue. This rules out the
classification of Bieber as a limited-purpose public figure.
3. Justin Bieber could successfully prove fault by showing that the
reporter (and Gossip.com) acted negligently in the publication of these
materials. The reporter failed to gather information from sources or
speak to Bieber himself before publishing the article. These are both
extremely basic and expected reporting procedures. Typically
organizations stray away from making serious accusations when it is
purely speculation most would have waited to run the story until
there was some trace of evidence.
At first I highly contemplated whether or not the reporter showed
actual malice by neglecting to get information from sources or uncover
the truth. After examining the case further I realized the reporter tried
to act ethically by consulting her editor before publishing the first
article, and by seeking an explanation from sources before publishing
the second article.
My evaluation also took timeliness and probability into account.
News organizations (especially gossip columns) are always looking for
the inside scoop. The race to break the news before competitors
likely played a big part in their actions. In terms of probability I dont

find it irrational to suspect Bieber was abusing substances given his

past (and his behavior that night). Given these factors, I dont think the
reporter acted with actual malice.
In terms of libel, I think Justin should easily win the lawsuit. As I
outlined in question one, the accusations produced in the first
publication meet all of the criteria for libel. The article was published
online, explicitly stated Justins name, and included defamatory
statements that ultimately were false. In addition, Justin has a strong
case to advocate fault by the reporter.
4. I find it very unlikely that Justin Bieber could win the publication-ofprivate-info lawsuit. The information about Biebers daughter is not
embarrassing, and more importantly, it is the truth. Since Bieber is an
all-purpose public figure his life has (expectedly) been placed in the
limelight. Public figures generally have less privacy than regular
citizens and details of their lives are considered to be of public
concern. Although Bieber had been trying to hide this information, the
reporter did not violate his right to privacy given the scope of privacy
he is allotted as a public figure.
5. I am also skeptical that Justin Bieber would win the appropriations
lawsuit. Although the controversial content and photos used in the
article about Bieber was likely a tactic to gain profit, our text states
that organizations cannot be penalized simply for making monetary
gains off their work. The article and photos do not explicitly or
implicitly state that Bieber uses or endorses a specific product or
business. Also, the photos relate to the news content provided in the
article. Therefore, since Biebers name and photos are not used as an
advertisement or distributed for commercial purposes, I find it hard to
believe he would win this case.
6. To be considered inflicting emotional distress the allegations must
be outrageous and likely inappropriate, as well as show an act of
malice. As I explained earlier (in question three) I cannot attribute the
reporters actions to an act of malice. The reporter and editor definitely
made an error in judgment and failed to follow typical protocol, but it
does not appear that they had prior knowledge of the truth before
posting the publications online. Also, the reporter attempted to follow
up on the story and contact sources to get an explanation for his
behavior before publishing the second article. Due to this, I would not
consider the reporters actions an act of malice.
Additionally, even though the reporter made some very strong
accusations I would not consider them outrageous, nor were they
presented distastefully. Given Biebers history with reckless behavior
and his behavior on the night of the event, I dont find it far-fetched to

entertain the idea that he might have abused substances. This also
indicates that the allegations made do not fall under inflicting
emotional distress.
Based on my evaluations it would be unlikely for Bieber to win
this lawsuit. If it was discovered that the reporter did not actually
contact sources or seek further information (like she stated in the
second publication) then I think Bieber could argue the act was one of
malice, and that distress was intentionally inflicted. However, that is
just speculation. Given the actual occurrence of the event I think he
would have a hard time winning this lawsuit.