|
0748 By injecting itself into various public controversies, a radio station and its proprietor became public figures and, in their defamation action against a rival radio station, they were therefore required to show that defamatory statements about them were false and made with knowledge of their falsity or with a serious doubt about their truth; responsibility in broadcasting is a matter of public concern.CitationSTOLZ v KSFM (Radio Wars) 30 CA4 195 [See: NY Times v Sullivan 376 US 254; Curtis v Butts 388 US 130; Gertz v Robert Welch 418 US 323; Phila Newspapers v Hepps 475 US 767; Dun & Bradstreet v Greenmoss 472 US 749; Denney v Lawrence 22 CA4 927; Live Oak v Cohagan 234 CA3 1277]
|
|
