Are news reporters in Utah open to the same scrutiny and criticism they dish out to the public figures they cover?
The answer is now up to the state Supreme Court.
The question stems from a defamation lawsuit former television health reporter Holly Wayment filed against her former employer, KTVX and Clear Channel Broadcasting.
Wayment said she was forced to resign from KTVX after station management called into question her relationship with the Huntsman Cancer Institute. Specifically, Wayment alleged that management had told others at the station that she had taken money from the institute and that she was "in bed" with them.
Randy Dryer, attorney for KTVX, said Wayment was given the option of resigning or being fired after managers discovered she was planning to set up a nonprofit group connected to the Huntsman Cancer Institute without seeking permission from the station. Dryer said the reported plan was a conflict of interest and in clear violation of the station's ethics policy.
In her defamation suit against the station, Wayment alleged that comments that she took money from the Institute, among others, were not true.
A district court judge threw out Wayment's suit, finding that because she was a television reporter she was considered a public figure. The judge also ruled that Wayment could not provide a single witness to show that managers Jon Fischer and Patrick Benedict made the alleged comments. She has since appealed the case to the Utah Supreme Court.
Whether or not someone is a public figure is a key factor in slander and libel cases. Unlike private citizens, who when libeled need only prove the statements untrue; public figures need to also prove the comments were made with the purpose of malice.
Dryer said the case should put all reporters, newspaper and television alike, on notice that if the Supreme Court so rules, they would be held to the same legal standards as the high-profile people they report on.
"Being a public figure opens you up to more scrutiny and criticism," Dryer told Supreme Court justices during oral arguments Thursday. "It just goes with the territory."
Dryer said Wayment held herself out to be a local celebrity. "She had made thousands of TV appearances," he said, as well as helped with local charities and appeared in KTVX promotional commercials. At one point, Wayment and her twin sister appeared in Oprah Magazine, he said.
Wayment's attorney, Derek Davis, said the First Amendment gave latitude to criticize public officials, such as elected officials. Later, public figures were created as a limited class to be held by the same standards as public officials. Davis said to consider Wayment as a high-profile person is a stretch and the line of public figures must be drawn somewhere.
Chief Justice Christine Durham asked if being a public figure simply requires putting one's self out in the public spotlight. "She is a TV reporter, after all," Durham said.
Davis said people must also thrust themselves into an "ongoing controversy." In Wayment's case, he said, she was simply doing her job as a television reporter.
Justice Ronald Nehring asked if a local newspaper reporter had done the same thing, he or she would be considered a public figure. Dryer said he would consider them as such also.
The justices took the arguments under advisement and are expected to issue a ruling in the coming weeks.
Dryer said 12 other cases across the United States found reporters, not just network anchors but also local newspaper and television reporters, to be public figures. If Utah's high court rules that reporters here are public figures, Dryer said that ruling would run in line with national case law.
E-mail: gfattah@desnews.com