The Research On Burden Of Proof In News Tort

News infringement is a behaviour making use of mass media by news organizations or practitioners who intentionally, negligently or other badly broadcast something wrong or illegal to the public and this infringes on personality civil rights. News tortation is different from general litigation in its main news features, special and behavioral characteristics, therefore, when burden of Proof, they are also different.When studying burden of proof of news tortation in different districts, we find out it is very different between China(Main Land, we name as China as below) and Anglo-American law system about the proof of media infringement of the reputation right. In Chinese law, news infringement is one infringement of the civil so there are profound theoretical guidelines for burden of Proof. Meanwhile, Anglo-American has the libel laws for adjustment. United Kingdom follows the traditional laws on libel laws and have come out a faultless proof system. In1964,’New York Time Against v. Sullivan’USA news media came to constitutional adjustments stage of libel, and the U.S. Judiciary is trying its best to build a better and reasonable on proof system beyond tort systemWe should make balance between "News Freedom"and’Personality right protect of burden of Pproof in news tort. About substantive law, it needs be improved the infringement elements and the "public figure" defined. As the procedural law, when involving in enterprises and the masses, it should be burden of proof in reverse. News tort plaintiff should bear burden of proof in news tort action, damage results, the reason and results of tort and damages and defendants bear the burden of proof of subjective fault. Refer to the case of public figures, it should be" the proof one sound"plaintiff should bear burden of proof both of news tort action, damage results, the reason and results of tort and damages and proof of subjective fault. When the infringing work cannot be identified, judges should be based on the principles of fairness and good faith and consider the parties difficulty of proof and "with the evidence distances" to decide the ditribution of the burden of proof.