Libel pro quod requires extrinsic evidence to assess impact.

• A. False
• B. True
• C. Only damages are required
• D. It applies only to public figures

Answer: (B)

Libel per quod relies on context outside the exact words to show what the statement really meant and how it harmed the plaintiff’s reputation. Because the defamatory meaning isn’t clear from the text itself, you need extrinsic facts—like the plaintiff’s status, the surrounding circumstances, and how the publication would be understood by the audience—to interpret the implication and prove damage. That’s why this form of defamation typically requires showing actual damages or the evidentiary context that demonstrates the harm.

In contrast, libel per se involves statements that are defamatory on their face (for example, accusing someone of theft or a serious immoral act) and are actionable without proving damages. So the need for extrinsic evidence to assess impact is characteristic of libel per quod, making the true choice the best one.