An incident in which the defamer knows that the material is false but doesn't care.
The publication of defamatory material with reckless disregard for the truth or knowledge of its falsity. Actual malice should be distinguished from "malice" or "ill will."รก adversary hearing A legal procedure in which evidence is heard from opposing parties. An adversary hearing should be distinguished from an ex parte hearing, in which evidence is heard from only one party.
Actual malice occurs when defamatory material is published intentionally knowing it was untrue and harmful and disregarding its truth or falsehood.
To win a defamation suit, public officials or prominent people, such as political candidates or movie stars, must prove that the offender made a false statement with actual malice. This means the statement was made with knowledge that it was false or with serious doubts about whether it was true.
In libel law "actual malice" is "knowledge of falsity," "reckless disregard of the truth," or "departure from standards of care." There are ... things the Lord hates, ... a lying tongue ... a false witness who puts out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers" (Proverbs 6:16-19).
Actual malice in United States law is a condition required to establish libel against public figures and is defined as "knowledge that the information was false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." This is the definition in only the United States and came from the landmark 1964 lawsuit New York Times Co. v. Sullivan that ruled that public officials needed to prove actual malice in order to recover damages for libel.
