Legal Definitions - public character

The term public character is another way of referring to a public figure. In legal contexts, particularly in defamation law, a public figure is an individual who has achieved widespread fame or notoriety, or who has voluntarily stepped into a particular public controversy to influence its outcome. The law generally recognizes two types:

• All-purpose public figures: These are individuals who possess such pervasive fame or influence that they are considered public figures in virtually all contexts.
• Limited-purpose public figures: These are individuals who, although not generally famous, have voluntarily injected themselves into a specific public controversy or issue to influence its resolution.

This distinction is important because public figures typically face a higher legal standard when suing for defamation (libel or slander). They usually must prove that a false statement was made with "actual malice"—meaning the person making the statement knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for whether it was true or false.

Examples:

• Example 1 (All-purpose public figure): A world-renowned professional athlete who has won multiple championships and is a household name across many countries. Due to their extensive fame and influence, any statements made about their personal life or professional conduct would likely be subject to the higher "actual malice" standard if they were to sue for defamation. They are considered a public character because their celebrity is pervasive and not limited to a specific issue.

• Example 2 (Limited-purpose public figure): A local activist who organizes and leads community protests against a proposed new waste treatment plant, frequently speaking at town hall meetings, giving interviews to local newspapers, and appearing on television news segments to advocate for their cause. While this individual may not be famous outside of this specific local issue, they have voluntarily taken a prominent role in a public controversy. Therefore, for matters related to the waste treatment plant debate, they would likely be considered a public character, and any defamation claims they might bring regarding that issue would face the "actual malice" standard.

• Example 3 (Limited-purpose public figure): A prominent medical researcher who publishes groundbreaking studies on a controversial dietary supplement and then actively engages in public education campaigns, participates in national debates, and testifies before legislative bodies regarding the supplement's safety and efficacy. By choosing to step into the public discourse surrounding this specific health issue, the researcher becomes a public character for the purpose of that debate. If a media outlet were to publish false statements about their research or advocacy related to the supplement, the researcher would likely need to prove actual malice to win a defamation lawsuit.