|
2494 REVIEW DENIED Statements made by a newspaper in a retraction and in a subsequent follow up article that information contained in a previously published article was inaccurate, unfair, and lacked balance did not make a demonstrably false statement about the reporter who wrote the retracted article and were not subject to defamation liability; a newspaper's termination of a reporter employed on an at will basis because of dissatisfaction with his/her writing does not violate the First Amendment rights of the reporter and is within the First Amendment rights of the newspaper.CitationEISENBERG v ALAMEDA NEWSPAPERS (Defamatory Retraction) 74 CA4 1359 [See: CivC 48a, 47(b); Gertz v Robert Welch 418 US 323; Milkovich v Lorain 497 US 1; Silberg v Anderson 50 C3 205; Edwards v Centex 53 CA4 15, T/AT 4/97; Miami Herald v Tornillo 418 US 241]
|
|
