I'm not a lawyer, but I've seen sources that say that broadcasters may be responsible for a guest's defamatory statements.
Matthew Bunker and Clay Calvert, "'Defamation Live': The Confusing Legal Landscape of Republication in Live Broadcasting
and a Call for a 'Breaking News Doctrine,'" from the "Columbia Journal of Law and Arts," page 498 (page 2 of the PDF)
“… [D]efamation law generally holds liable everyone who republishes a defamatory statement… So, if a statement goes out live over a broadcaster’s signal, regardless of who said it, the broadcaster is considered a republisher—and thereby culpable—in most jurisdictions.
“There are, of course, various ameliorating doctrines that may soften the blow of this ‘harsh’ republication rule. These doctrines include a fair report privilege for reporting official statements by government officials and a neutral reportage privilege that exists in a few jurisdictions. Nonetheless, in many scenarios broadcasters face significant risks when third parties make defamatory statements in live broadcasts, particularly when the broadcaster has some advance knowledge of what is about to be said.”
"As we have just seen, the plaintiff himself, in certain situations and in certain jurisdictions, can be the publisher of the defamatory statements that have harmed him. There are three other kinds of defendants who can be held liable for defamation:
"(1) Original publishers
(2) Re-publishers, and
(3) Disseminators.
"An original publisher is anyone who has played a part in the original publication of the defamatory statement. Authors, their book publishers, newspaper reporters and editors, are all considered original publishers and could be held liable for defamatory statements.
"A re-publisher is someone who repeats someone else’s defamatory statement. For example:
"Opie, a radio disk jockey, reads passages from a newly published book while doing his morning radio show. The book in general, and the passages read by Opie in particular, defame Anthony. In this situation, the book’s author, and possibly his editor and publisher, are all original publishers. The disc jockey however is considered a re-publisher because he has repeated someone else’s defamatory statements."
view the rest of the comments →
Bill_Murrays_Sandals ago
How unbelievably stupid has CNN become? Sue the shit out of them please for the love of god. Wipe those smug smiles off their fat fucking faces.
AreWeSure ago
CNN is not liable for defamation that is said by a guest. Did CNN repeat it?
zoltan907 ago
I'm not a lawyer, but I've seen sources that say that broadcasters may be responsible for a guest's defamatory statements.
Matthew Bunker and Clay Calvert, "'Defamation Live': The Confusing Legal Landscape of Republication in Live Broadcasting and a Call for a 'Breaking News Doctrine,'" from the "Columbia Journal of Law and Arts," page 498 (page 2 of the PDF)
http://jla.journals.cdrs.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2016/06/2-39.4-Calvert.pdf
“… [D]efamation law generally holds liable everyone who republishes a defamatory statement… So, if a statement goes out live over a broadcaster’s signal, regardless of who said it, the broadcaster is considered a republisher—and thereby culpable—in most jurisdictions.
“There are, of course, various ameliorating doctrines that may soften the blow of this ‘harsh’ republication rule. These doctrines include a fair report privilege for reporting official statements by government officials and a neutral reportage privilege that exists in a few jurisdictions. Nonetheless, in many scenarios broadcasters face significant risks when third parties make defamatory statements in live broadcasts, particularly when the broadcaster has some advance knowledge of what is about to be said.”
https://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_files/torts2/Defamation/GeneralPrinciplesOfDefamation1.asp
"As we have just seen, the plaintiff himself, in certain situations and in certain jurisdictions, can be the publisher of the defamatory statements that have harmed him. There are three other kinds of defendants who can be held liable for defamation:
"(1) Original publishers (2) Re-publishers, and (3) Disseminators.
"An original publisher is anyone who has played a part in the original publication of the defamatory statement. Authors, their book publishers, newspaper reporters and editors, are all considered original publishers and could be held liable for defamatory statements.
"A re-publisher is someone who repeats someone else’s defamatory statement. For example:
"Opie, a radio disk jockey, reads passages from a newly published book while doing his morning radio show. The book in general, and the passages read by Opie in particular, defame Anthony. In this situation, the book’s author, and possibly his editor and publisher, are all original publishers. The disc jockey however is considered a re-publisher because he has repeated someone else’s defamatory statements."