Final answer:
In libel law, a statement can result in defendant liability only if made with 'actual malice,' meaning it must be proven that the statement was made with a knowledge of its falsity or with a reckless disregard for truth, especially concerning public officials.
Step-by-step explanation:
In libel law, a defendant cannot be found liable for defamation unless his/her statement was not true, and this is known as actual malice. Actual malice is a legal standard established by the Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which requires that a statement must be made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth in order for it to constitute libel against public officials. For private individuals, states are allowed to formulate their own standards of liability for defamation as noted in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., but such liability cannot be imposed without fault.
Defamation occurs only with false information presented as fact. Public figures face a significant barrier to winning defamation cases, as they must demonstrate reckless disregard for the truth or malicious intent in the publication of the statements about them. This standard is intended to protect freedom of expression, particularly in regard to speech concerning public affairs and criticism of public officials.