Skip to main content

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Helen MacGill Hughes, News and the Human Interest Story (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1940), 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gunther Barth, City People: The Rise of Modern City Culture in Nineteenth Century America (new York: Oxford University Press, 1980), 106–108.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lawrence Meir Friedman, The Republic of Choice: Law, Authority, and Culture (cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990), 4.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Janna Malamud Smith, Private Matters (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1997), 187–192.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Henry James, The Reverberator (London: MacMillan, 1888)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Benjamin McArthur, Actors and American Culture (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2000), 151.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bishop, “Newspaper Espionage,” Forum (1886): 535

    Google Scholar 

  8. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Review 4.5 (1890): 193, 214, 196.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Don R. Pember, Privacy and the Press: The Law, the Mass Media, and the First Amendment (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1972), 10–11

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dorothy J. Glancy, “The Invention of the Right to Privacy,” Arizona Law Review 21 (1979): 1, 8

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Review 4.5 (1890): 195.

    Google Scholar 

  14. William L. Prosser, “Privacy,” California Law Review 48 (1960): 383, 398.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lyn Gorman and David McLean, Media and Society into the Twenty First Century: A Historical Introduction (Malden, MA: John Wiley, 2009), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  16. David Kyvig, Daily Life in the United States, 1920–1940 (Chicago, IL: Ivan R. Dee, 2004), 190–1.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Newman Levy, “The Right to Be Let Alone,” American Mercury 35 (1935): 190.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Van Vechten Veeder, “The History and Theory of the Law of Defamation,” Columbia Law Review 4 (1904): 33.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Martin Newell, The Law of Defamation, Libel, and Slander (chicago: Callaghan Co., 1890), 37.

    Google Scholar 

  20. William Odgers, A Digest of the Law of Libel and Slander (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, 1887), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Frank Thayer, “The Changing Libel Scene,” Wisconsin Law Review 1943 (1943): 331, 333.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rosenberg, Protecting the Best Men, 222–223. See, for example, Sweeney v. Schenectady Union Pub. Co., 122 F. 2d 288 (2d Cir. 1941).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Louis Stotesbury, “Famous Annie Oakley Libel Suits,” The American Lawyer 13 (1905): 391.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  27. See William L. Prosser, “Insult and Outrage,” California Law Review 44 (1956): 40–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Calvert Magruder, “Mental and Emotional Disturbance in the Law of Torts,” Harvard Law Review 49 (1936): 1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. McManamon v. Daily Freeman, 6 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2245 (NY Sup. Ct. 1980); Rutledge v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 148 Ariz. 555 (Ariz. 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Falwell v. Flynt, 797 F.2d 1270, 1273 (4th Cir. 1986). This was revised in Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 US 46 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  32. G. Edward White, Tort Law in America (oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 175.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rodney A. Smolla, Suing the Press: Libel, the Media, and Power (oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 6.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Daniel J. Boorstin, The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America (new York: Athenaeum, 1962)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Samantha Barbas, “The Laws of Image,” New England Law Review 47 (2012): 70.

    Google Scholar 

  36. 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.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Kathleen A. Feeley Jennifer Frost

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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics