Recognizing And Minimizing Tort And Regulatory Risk Scott Sullivan University of Phoenix Abstract Based on the simulation of Alumina Inc. and examination of how tort law and regulatory risk affected said simulation, the goal of this paper is to identify how management (of Alumina Inc. specifically) can detect and correct errors, as well as implementing preventative measures for the future. A discussion of the first attempt with the Alumina/Bates simulation will show the offenses, if any, of the parties involved, the laws/regulations under which the offenses fall, and the steps that Alumina can take to reduce the likelihood of further offenses. An attached table will be available for showing the issues and principles found after collaboration with members of Team D. A violation that was found was that of Defamation by The Erehwon Reporter_ – _“For defamation to occur, the statement must be communicated to a third party” (Jennings, p. 368). The third party in this case was anyone who would have read the newspaper, or heard about the story secondhand from anyone who would have read the editorial. The damage that Alumina can claim is that of loss of reputation based on the editorial, which is evidenced by the retraction and admission to not having all the facts by Erehwon. Due to this admission by the paper, they no longer have a defense under the First Amendment. “Because the First Amendment provides protections for the media, those who are public figures must prove, in addition to the other elements of defamation, that the statements were made or printed with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false” (Jennings, pp. 369-70). Furthermore, it will be difficult for the paper to claim “qualified privilege” (“freedom to publish information even though it may be inaccurate, so long as it is not published with malice or with reckless disregard for whether the information published is true or false”) after having...