Ethics

My ethical dilemma is a little different because the lines for libel are a little blurred for tabloids. They are always alleging ridiculous claims about celebrities and no one seems to sue, they just correct the statements in an interview. This March, Katie Holmes sued Star magazine for $50 million in damages for suggesting that she was a drug addict in a headline. The headline read, "Addiction Nightmare. Katie Drug Shocker!"

The article actually didn't make any allegations about drug use, but was really about scientology counseling. From my perspective, since I would never pick up a copy of Star, if I saw the headline, I would think Katie Holmes was a drug addict. Thats what thousands of other people thought, too and Katie Holmes sued for libel.

I would never work for a tabloid unless I was very poor, but if I did, I certainly would not have published the article with this headline. Since the article has no evidence to support the drug claims, it seems like someone must have known they were going to get sued.

Libel

This story in the AJC today about a Nevada doctor who is accused of reusing needles on multiple patients could have easily been libelous had it not been handled correctly. The doctor is identified by name and, considering his patients are now being urged to be tested for HIV, will probably never be able to work as a doctor again. The writer was careful to include only statements from the Southern Nevada Health District, which is involved in the investigation. Had the story included statements from affected patients or someone closer to the situation, it could have easily turned into libel.