Hi can someone please proofread this body paragraph of my research paper.. it's contrasting the 'fault standards' between Japan and the US
In the United States, fault standard depends on the fame or notoriety of the plaintiff. A plaintiff who is a public figure has a difficult task of overcoming the media’s strong constitutional protections. The plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant made a defamatory statement with actual malice in order to win their case. However, in Japan, the fame or notoriety of the plaintiff is not considered in applying the test for determining whether libel has been constituted, which is whether the plaintiff’s reputation in society has been injured. Japan has developed a libel approach geared toward protecting individual interests. Under Japanese law, the media carries the burden of proving truth as a defense to the alleged defamation. Remedies focus less on compensation and more on restoring the defamed individual’s place in society.
Should it not say in an introductory sentence that you are talking about libel?
Such as: " Libel is viewed differently in United Staes and Japanese law and is far more difficult to establish in a Japanese court. "
win THE case or HIS OR HER case (singular or say "the defendants)
constituted --> do you mean "committed "
Why do you only talk about the "media" like my daughter who is a lawyer does as well? Individuals (including me by the way) are sued for libel after provoking government officials.
" Libel is viewed differently in United Staes and Japanese law and is far more difficult to establish in a United States court. "
well this is a mass media/journalism law class
But I guess I could include that point by talking about 'private persons'
Sure, here is the proofread version of your paragraph:
In the United States, the fault standard depends on the fame or notoriety of the plaintiff. A plaintiff who is a public figure faces the difficult task of overcoming the media’s strong constitutional protections. The plaintiff must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant made a defamatory statement with actual malice in order to win their case. However, in Japan, the fame or notoriety of the plaintiff is not considered when applying the test to determine whether libel has been committed. The focus in Japan is on whether the plaintiff's reputation in society has been damaged. Japan has developed a libel approach that is designed to protect individual interests. According to Japanese law, the media is burdened with proving truth as a defense against alleged defamation. Remedies in Japan are less focused on compensation and more on restoring the defamed individual's place in society.
Great job on your research paper!