Also known as: false-light · false light invasion of privacy
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A tortious invasion of privacy arising when one gives publicity to a matter concerning another that places the other before the public in a false light that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. The actor must have acted with knowledge of or reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed.
An entertainment network aired a segment on celebrity drug relapses and used a still image of Frank Fisher stepping out of a rehab facility from an unrelated documentary. The narration and graphics suggested that Frank was secretly battling addiction even though he has never used drugs. Frank sued the network for invasion of privacy.
A news outlet published an article about Freya Freeman that contained minor inaccuracies but was substantially true overall. Freya sued claiming the article placed her in a false light before the public. The court dismissed the claim because the reporting was protected and could not be circumvented through a false light action.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A retail chain created a loss-prevention training video using security footage of Felipe Figueroa during an ordinary shift. The narrator stated that the footage showed a member of an internal shoplifting ring and posted the video on the company's public YouTube channel. Felipe sued the chain for false light invasion of privacy.
A television network broadcast a segment about Fatima Flores, a well-known public figure, that contained false statements placing her in an offensive light. Fatima sued for false light invasion of privacy. The court required her to prove that the network published the material with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.
A magazine published an article describing a play as a reenactment of a hostage incident involving Felix Franco and his family, using photographs of actors in the family home. The account contained substantial fictional elements that placed the family in a false light. Felix sued the publisher for invasion of privacy.
A broadcasting company televised Frederick Ferguson's entire human cannonball act without his consent during a county fair performance. Frederick sued the company for invasion of privacy on a false light theory. The court held that the claim was governed by the distinct right of publicity rather than false light principles.
A plaintiff must show that the defendant gave publicity to a matter concerning the plaintiff that placed the plaintiff before the public in a false light that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. The defendant must also have acted with knowledge of or reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light created.
Supporting sources
When the matter involves the public interest or a public figure, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. This standard mirrors the constitutional limitations applied to defamation claims.
Supporting sources
No. Where the alleged false light arises from substantially true reporting or protected opinion, the claim fails as a matter of law because false light cannot be used to circumvent constitutional protections afforded to speech.
Supporting sources
False light protects the interest in not being made to appear before the public in an objectionable false light even when the statements are not defamatory. The tort focuses on the highly offensive impression created rather than injury to reputation alone.
Supporting sources
…created a cause of action for invasion of privacy by giving publicity to matters concerning an individual that placed him in a false light before the public. A jury awarded Hill compensatory and punitive damages; the Appellate Division affirmed but the New York Court of Appeals reversed the punitive damages award while…