February 15, 2012
University of Phoenix
This paper will examine the lawsuit filed by Shirley Jones against The National Enquirer, Inc., a business based in Florida, and its president. The lawsuit, filed in California, was for alleged defamation, emotional distress, and invasion of privacy. In addition, this paper will examine what type of paper the National Enquirer is, along with the ethics behind trying to avoid the suit. Furthermore, the following paper will inquire about the defendants subject to suit in California.
The National Enquirer is a supermarket tabloid that exaggerates information received, usually from tips that were purchased, involving people in the limelight: politicians, celebrities, et cetera. It is referred to as a “supermarket tabloid” because it is commonly found in the checkout aisle of a grocery store. The paper is “an American original for nearly 80 years” and it is said that “no other publication breaks as many big celebrity stories as the National Enquirer” (American Media, Inc., 2012). From the type of material the tabloid puts out there, one could say that people only read it for a good laugh and to see just how ridiculous each story can be. It was unethical for the National Enquirer to try and avoid suit in California because they should take responsibility for their actions. Even though the president of the tabloid is a resident of Florida they should still address the suit in court since it involves their company. A legal suit such as this example should only apply to the state if all parties involved are within that one state. But in a matter such as this one involving the National Enquirer and its president, the state should only matter for where the suit is being filed. The president of the tabloid being a resident of Florida shouldn’t have anything to do with the suit. The defendants are subject to suit in California because that is where the suit is being filed...