Final answer:
To recover for defamation, a plaintiff must prove the publication of a false statement about them with fault, and that the statement caused harm. Public officials or figures must also demonstrate 'actual malice.' These standards are set to protect freedom of expression while balancing harm to reputation.
Step-by-step explanation:
To recover for defamation, a plaintiff must demonstrate specific elements that establish the defamation claim. In cases involving public officials or public figures, the plaintiff has to prove that the statements were made with "actual malice". This means showing that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The landmark case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan emphasized that the First Amendment requires this higher standard of proof for public officials to protect freedom of expression and prevent the stifling of criticism.
Defamation laws vary depending on whether the plaintiff is a public or private figure. For a private individual, some states may have a lower standard than actual malice. However, under Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., states cannot impose liability without some fault, and if the standard is lower than actual malice, only actual damages may be awarded. Furthermore, proving a defamation case also involves establishing the publication of a false statement, that the statement was about the plaintiff, and that it caused harm such as a loss of reputation or income.
In summary, the specific proofs required for a defamation case depend on the plaintiff's status as a public or private figure, the state's specific laws, and the nature of the statement. Public figures have a more burdensome task, as the standards for what constitutes defamation are stricter to ensure a robust free exchange of ideas, particularly about public affairs.