## Facts

- A local newspaper published an article about Jeffery Todd Burke’s indictment and arrest related to a youth football league fundraiser involving cookie-dough sales.
- The reporter obtained key information in a nonpublic, one-on-one interview with a county sheriff’s department detective who was also the department’s public information officer and lead investigator.
- Burke alleged the article contained inaccuracies about (1) the amount misappropriated, (2) whether cookie dough was delivered, and (3) whether Burke turned over collected funds to the fundraising company.
- Burke sued the publisher for defamation and false light, alleging reputational harm, job loss, and emotional distress.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the newspaper based on the fair report privilege; the intermediate appellate court reversed.

## Issues

1. Whether the fair report privilege protects a news report based on allegedly defamatory statements obtained in a nonpublic, one-on-one conversation with a law-enforcement detective/public information officer.
2. Whether a government official’s status as a public information officer can, by itself, render a private interview an “official action” within the fair report privilege.

## Decision

- The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court and reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the newspaper.
- The court held the fair report privilege applies only to public proceedings or official actions of government that have been made public.
- The privilege did not apply because the article was based on a nonpublic, one-on-one conversation rather than a public proceeding or a publicized official governmental action.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings, without deciding falsity, defamation, or other defenses.

## Legal Principles

- The fair report privilege protects fair and accurate reports of official actions or proceedings, grounded in the public interest in access to information about government activity.
- In Tennessee, the privilege is limited to (1) public proceedings or (2) official actions of government that have been made public.
- Informal, nonpublic communications with government officials—even when the official speaks in an official capacity—are not covered merely because the speaker is a public official or public information officer.
- The privilege’s scope turns on the public nature of the underlying proceeding or action, not the identity or title of the source.

## Conclusion

The Tennessee Supreme Court held that the fair report privilege does not shield a publisher when the allegedly defamatory report is based on a private, one-on-one interview with a law-enforcement official; the privilege is confined to reports of public proceedings or publicized official government actions, and the case returned to the trial court for litigation on the merits.


Burke v. Sparta Newspapers, Inc., 592 S.W.3d 116 (Tenn. 2019)