Civics 101 NY Times v Sullivan: What if the press couldn’t tell the truth?
13 snips
Feb 25, 2025 Samantha Barbas, a law professor from Iowa College and author of *Actual Malice*, joins the discussion on the landmark Supreme Court case, New York Times v. Sullivan. She explains how this 1964 decision transformed defamation law and protected press freedom during the Civil Rights Movement. The conversation delves into the 'actual malice' standard, its origins in the fight against racial injustice, and its relevance today amidst evolving libel concerns. Barbas also emphasizes the continuing struggle for media accountability in a democratic society.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Zanna's Childhood Experience
- Zanna saw footage of a civil rights protest in Birmingham, Alabama, where police used fire hoses and dogs on peaceful child protesters.
- This experience had a profound impact on her, highlighting the stark contrast between right and wrong.
Visuals and Public Opinion
- Footage from civil rights protests consistently depicted Black individuals being harmed by white individuals.
- This stark imagery forced viewers to confront the question of which side they supported.
NY Times v. Sullivan Origins
- L.B. Sullivan, a police commissioner, sued the New York Times for libel in 1960 over an ad supporting civil rights activists.
- The ad, "Heed Their Rising Voices," contained minor factual errors, which Sullivan claimed defamed him, despite not being mentioned.
