What Kind of Paper Is the National Enquirer

What kind of paper is the National Enquirer?

The National Enquirer is an American supermarket tabloid paper, that is well known for exaggerating and fabricating information within their articles that generally focuses on celebrity, gossip and crime and as a result the Enquirer sells millions of copies a year.

Was it ethical for the National Enquirer to try to avoid suit in California?

In my opinion it was unethical for the National Enquirer to try and avoid being sued in California. The Enquirer no matter what state the principal office is located in should still hold the same ethical value in California that they would upheld in Florida. Although there is no cut and dry definition for ethics, the Enquirer still has a responsibility to the people in which they write articles about and their customers. There is a rule in the law that states a company should cause no harm to their customers or society, and anytime someone is defamed or there is an issue of privacy invasion, the company should be held responsible for their actions.

Are the defendants subject to suit in California? Why or why not?

Upon reading chapter 3, I would have to say that the defendants are subject to suit in the state of California. The National Enquirer had to target the state directly with their business with a minimum amount of direct contact. As the second largest market for the magazine with over 600,000 copies sold annually, the company fulfilled both the direct contact and minimum contact requirements. Even though the National Enquirer does business in California, besides the fact that the main office is located in Florida, they were aware of the high volume sales in California. They also knew that Shirley Jones lived in the state of California and that she was a current resident. So the information in which they were responsible for making aware to the public in regards to her alcoholism could've affect her lively hood. The Enquirer made this information public there in her state, California would have jurisdiction, besides the ruling was that California had jurisdiction therefore the case was heard in that state.