DOCSLIB.ORG

NCAA Student-Athletes and Defamation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NCAA Student-Athletes and Defamation Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2017 NCAA Student-Athletes and Defamation: Understanding Plaintiff lC assification and First Amendment Protection Lacey Elizabeth Sanchez Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Mass Communication Commons Recommended Citation Sanchez, Lacey Elizabeth, "NCAA Student-Athletes and Defamation: Understanding Plaintiff lC assification and First Amendment Protection" (2017). LSU Master's Theses. 4394. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/4394 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NCAA STUDENT-ATHLETES AND DEFAMATION: UNDERSTANDING PLAINTIFF CLASSIFICATION AND FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Mass Communication in The Department of Mass Communication by Lacey Elizabeth Sanchez B.S., Louisiana State University, 2013 May 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Dr. Coyle for your patience and guidance and Dr. Miller and Professor Mann for your continued support in the improvement of this work. Thank you. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ ii ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 A. Josh Boutte, a Recent Example ......................................................................................1 B. The NCAA and the Amateur Ceiling.............................................................................3 C. Holt v. Cox Enterprises, Inc. ..........................................................................................4 D. The Goal.........................................................................................................................7 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................8 A. Defamation, Understanding the Basics ..........................................................................8 B. The Case Law Evolution of Defamation .....................................................................11 1. New York Times v. Sullivan .............................................................................11 2. Curtis v. Butts...................................................................................................17 3. Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc ......................................................................21 4. Gertz v. Robert Welch ......................................................................................24 C. Defamation, Non-Media Defendants, and Private Concerns .......................................27 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................30 A. The First Amendment and Free Speech Theory ..........................................................30 B. The Marketplace of Ideas and Its Influence on Defamation ........................................32 1. New York Times v. Sullivan .............................................................................36 2. Gertz v. Robert Welch ......................................................................................38 3. Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. .....................................................................40 C. Protection of Publications Through First Amendment Theory ...................................42 1. The Watch Dog Theory ...................................................................................42 2. The Checking Value .......................................................................................44 3. Effect on the Law on Defamation ...................................................................45 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................................49 CHAPTER 5: METHODS .............................................................................................................50 CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................52 A. NCAA Student-Athletes and Their Ability to Bring a Defamation Claim ..................52 1. The Prima Facie Case ......................................................................................53 a. Defamation, Matters of Public Concern, and Falsity ...............................54 b. The Big Picture .........................................................................................60 2. Holt and the College Athlete Case ...................................................................61 3. Current Literature.............................................................................................64 4. NCAA Rules & Regulations ............................................................................68 B. Defamation and the Student-Athlete Plaintiff: Public Official, Private Person, Public Figure, and Matters of Public Concern .............................................................72 iii 1. Public Official ..................................................................................................73 a. In General .................................................................................................73 b. Case Law Analogy ...................................................................................74 2. Private Person ..................................................................................................76 a. In General .................................................................................................76 b. Case Law Analogy ...................................................................................79 3. Public Figure ....................................................................................................87 a. All-Purpose Public Figures ......................................................................88 b. Limited-Purpose Public Figures ...............................................................90 c. Case Law Analogy ...................................................................................94 d. Synthesizing Public Figures .....................................................................99 C. NCAA Student-Athletes and Non-Media Defendants ...............................................101 1. Suing a Non-Media Defendant ......................................................................101 2. Non-Media Defendant, Public or Private Plaintiff? .......................................104 a. Public Figure Plaintiff ............................................................................106 b. Private Person Plaintiff ...........................................................................108 3. Media v. Non-Media Defendant and Their Degree of First Amendment Protection .......................................................................................................113 D. Internet Defamation ...................................................................................................115 1. Arising Issues .................................................................................................115 2. What Internet Defamation Means for Student-Athletes ................................119 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................122 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................140 APPENDIX: IRB APPROVAL FORM.......................................................................................145 VITA ............................................................................................................................................146 iv ABSTRACT The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a $871.6 million industry. Well over $700 million of this annual income is generated from the media, giving collegiate athletics a national platform. This brings both opportunities and downfalls to amateur athletes who play NCAA sports and the journalists who report on their sporting events. Conflict often arises on the playing field and can continue off the field. With high profile athletic events aired nation-wide, comments are bound to be made about the athletes involved in the game. Some comments may even rise to the level of defamation. Through an in-depth examination of published court cases, this thesis explored whether a court would classify a student-athlete as a public official, public figure, or private person in a defamation suit. The thesis also examined whether the student- athlete would have to prove actual malice or negligence to win a defamation claim filed against a member of the news media or a social media user. Although few cases addressed the plaintiff status of a collegiate student-athlete
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diploma Mills” 1
    立法會 Legislative Council LC Paper No. CMI/19/04-05 Ref: CB(3)/C/1(V) Paper for the Committee on Members’ Interests’ meeting on 19 April 2005 An electronic mail message from a member of the public concerning the educational qualifications claimed by a Member of the Legislative Council Purpose This paper invites members of the Committee on Members’ Interests (the Committee) to consider an electronic mail (e-mail) message (Appendix 1) which a member of the public sent to the Committee’s clerk and which concerns the educational qualifications claimed by a Member of the Legislative Council (LegCo). An e-mail message from a member of the public 2. On 30th October 2004, the clerk to the Committee received an electronic mail message from Mr David Webb, a member of the public, raising doubts on the academic standing of the educational qualifications claimed by Dr Hon Philip WONG Yu-hong (the Member) on the LegCo web-site (Appendix 2). Mr Webb alleged that the Southland University and the California Coast University, from which the Member earned his juris and engineering doctorate degrees respectively, were unaccredited “diploma mills” 1 . To support his observation, Mr Webb cited the following references: i) an article entitled “Lawmaker’s degrees from ‘diploma mills’”, published in The Standard on 16 October 2004, which cast doubts on the Member’s doctorate degree qualifications (Appendix 3) (http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail_frame.cfm?articleid=51514&intcatid=1); ii) a testimony on the investigative findings relating to degrees from diploma mills by the United States Government Accountability Office before a Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, Committee on Education and the Workforce, the House of Representatives of the United States of America 1 The United States Government Accountability Office defines “diploma mills” as nontraditional, unaccredited, postsecondary schools that offer degrees for a relatively low flat fee, promote the award of academic credits based on life experience, and do not require any classroom instruction.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing Committee on Education and the Workforce U.S. House of Representatives
    ARE CURRENT SAFEGUARDS PROTECTING TAXPAYERS AGAINST DIPLOMA MILLS? HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON 21ST CENTURY COMPETITIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION September 23, 2004 Serial No. 108-72 Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house or Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 95-958 PDF WASHINGTON : 2004 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 19:10 Dec 05, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 H:\DOCS\95958 EDUWK PsN: NNIXON COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE JOHN A. BOEHNER, Ohio, Chairman Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Vice Chairman George Miller, California Cass Ballenger, North Carolina Dale E. Kildee, Michigan Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Major R. Owens, New York Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California Donald M. Payne, New Jersey Michael N. Castle, Delaware Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey Sam Johnson, Texas Lynn C. Woolsey, California James C. Greenwood, Pennsylvania Rube´n Hinojosa, Texas Charlie Norwood, Georgia Carolyn McCarthy, New York Fred Upton, Michigan John F. Tierney, Massachusetts Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan Ron Kind, Wisconsin Jim DeMint, South Carolina Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Johnny Isakson, Georgia David Wu, Oregon Judy Biggert, Illinois Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania Susan A.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenging Nonprofit Legal Services: Four Cases from New Orleans, 1970 - 2004
    University of New Orleans ScholarWorks@UNO University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations Dissertations and Theses 8-8-2007 Challenging Nonprofit Legal Services: Four Cases from New Orleans, 1970 - 2004 Louis Crust University of New Orleans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td Recommended Citation Crust, Louis, "Challenging Nonprofit Legal Services: Four Cases from New Orleans, 1970 - 2004" (2007). University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 583. https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/583 This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Challenging Nonprofit Legal Services: Four Cases from New Orleans, 1970 - 2004 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of New Orleans in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Urban Studies by Louis Crust B.A. Honours, University of Manitoba, 1976 M.A., Dalhousie University, 1996 August 2007 © 2007, Louis Crust ii Acknowledgments My sojourn at the University of New Orleans has been an adventure in every sense of the word, and many friends and fellow-students shared it with me and helped me through it.
    [Show full text]