Abstract
Gossip is old, but the phenomenon of mass-media gossip is of relatively recent origin. In the United States, gossip and “human-interest” journalism—”chatty little reports in tragic or comic incidents in the lives of the people”—became a regular feature the press by the mid-1800s.1 Seeking to achieve a broad popular readership in the burgeoning cities, publishers fashioned the “news” as entertainment. By the end of the century, most newspapers prominently discussed the personal affairs of public figures —actors, politicians, and businessmen —as well as those of ordinary people. The front pages of the papers overflowed with tales about private lives, ranging from stories about scandalous divorce cases and crimes of passion to the mundane activities of daily life.2 This innovation in publishing not only transformed social life and popular culture in the United States but led to significant innovations in the law as well.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Helen MacGill Hughes, News and the Human Interest Story (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1940), 12–13.
Gunther Barth, City People: The Rise of Modern City Culture in Nineteenth Century America (new York: Oxford University Press, 1980), 106–108.
Lawrence Meir Friedman, The Republic of Choice: Law, Authority, and Culture (cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990), 4.
Janna Malamud Smith, Private Matters (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1997), 187–192.
Henry James, The Reverberator (London: MacMillan, 1888)
Benjamin McArthur, Actors and American Culture (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2000), 151.
Bishop, “Newspaper Espionage,” Forum (1886): 535
Rochelle Gurstein, The Repeal of Reticence: A History of America’s Cultural and Legal Struggles Over Free Speech, Obscenity, Sexual Liberation, and Modern Art (Hill and Wang, 1998), 37, 154.
Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Review 4.5 (1890): 193, 214, 196.
Don R. Pember, Privacy and the Press: The Law, the Mass Media, and the First Amendment (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1972), 10–11
Dorothy J. Glancy, “The Invention of the Right to Privacy,” Arizona Law Review 21 (1979): 1, 8
Pavesich v. New England Life Ins. Co., 50 S.E. 68 (Ga. 1905); Pritchett v. Knox Cty. Bd. of Comm’rs, 85 N.E. 32 (Ind. App. 1908); Foster-Millburn Co. v. Chinn, 127 S.W. 476 (Ky. 1910); Schulman v. Whitaker, 39 So. 737 (La. 1906); Vanderbilt v. Mitchell, 67 A. 97 (N.J. E. & A. 1907); N.Y. Civ. Rights Law§ 50 (NY 1903); Utah Code Ann. §§ 76–4-8 (Utah 1909); Va. Code Ann. §8-650 (VA 1904).
Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Review 4.5 (1890): 195.
William L. Prosser, “Privacy,” California Law Review 48 (1960): 383, 398.
Lyn Gorman and David McLean, Media and Society into the Twenty First Century: A Historical Introduction (Malden, MA: John Wiley, 2009), 24.
David Kyvig, Daily Life in the United States, 1920–1940 (Chicago, IL: Ivan R. Dee, 2004), 190–1.
Newman Levy, “The Right to Be Let Alone,” American Mercury 35 (1935): 190.
Van Vechten Veeder, “The History and Theory of the Law of Defamation,” Columbia Law Review 4 (1904): 33.
Martin Newell, The Law of Defamation, Libel, and Slander (chicago: Callaghan Co., 1890), 37.
William Odgers, A Digest of the Law of Libel and Slander (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, 1887), 2.
Frank Thayer, “The Changing Libel Scene,” Wisconsin Law Review 1943 (1943): 331, 333.
On newspaper lawyers in this era, see Norman L. Rosenberg, Protecting the Best Men: An Interpretive History of the Law of Libel (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), 225 and Thayer, “The Changing Libel Scene,” 341.
Rosenberg, Protecting the Best Men, 222–223. See, for example, Sweeney v. Schenectady Union Pub. Co., 122 F. 2d 288 (2d Cir. 1941).
David Riesman, “Democracy and Defamation: Fair Game and Fair Comment II,” Columbia Law Review 42 (1942): 1282, 1288; John Hallen, “Fair Comment,” Texas Law Review 8 (1929): 41.
Louis Stotesbury, “Famous Annie Oakley Libel Suits,” The American Lawyer 13 (1905): 391.
See Mary Desjardins, “Systematizing Scandal: Confidential Magazine, Stardom, and the State of California,” in Headline Hollywood: A Century of Film Scandal, ed. Adrienne L. McLean and David A. Cook (new Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1986), 206–231.
See William L. Prosser, “Insult and Outrage,” California Law Review 44 (1956): 40–41
Daniel Givelber, “The Right to Minimum Social Decency and the Limits of Evenhandedness: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress by Outrageous Conduct,” Columbia Law Review 82 (1982): 43.
Calvert Magruder, “Mental and Emotional Disturbance in the Law of Torts,” Harvard Law Review 49 (1936): 1058.
McManamon v. Daily Freeman, 6 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2245 (NY Sup. Ct. 1980); Rutledge v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 148 Ariz. 555 (Ariz. 1986).
Falwell v. Flynt, 797 F.2d 1270, 1273 (4th Cir. 1986). This was revised in Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 US 46 (1988).
G. Edward White, Tort Law in America (oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 175.
Rodney A. Smolla, Suing the Press: Libel, the Media, and Power (oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 6.
Daniel J. Boorstin, The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America (new York: Athenaeum, 1962)
Samantha Barbas, “The Laws of Image,” New England Law Review 47 (2012): 70.
Georg Simmel, “The Metropolis and Mental Life” (1903) in The Blackwell City Reader, ed. Gary Bridge and Sophie Watson (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002): 18.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2014 Kathleen A. Feeley and Jennifer Frost
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barbas, S. (2014). Gossip Law. In: Feeley, K.A., Frost, J. (eds) When Private Talk Goes Public. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137442307_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137442307_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-49502-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-44230-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)