Recent rulings of the United States Supreme Court and other courts have tried to maintain a balance between a free and unintimidated press and some measure of protection for individuals against libelous accusations. The language of recent rulings suggests that the courts are focusing on impartiality and objectivity in reporting as a standard of liability in libel suits; thus, individuals are held to enjoy a right to "neutral reportage." This implies a formal endorsement of journalism's unfortunate "naive empiricism." In practice, the privilege of neutral reportage serves to inhibit social inquiry and to discourage journalists in their search for truth. The privilege of neutral reportage runs counter to the needs of a community since it affords greater freedom of expression to those with power and status. (DF)