Still, the jury found the article defamatory because it had not fully proved the accuracy of all of its content. The jury faulted the newspaper, for instance, for not noting that the officer had received a limited amount of rescue training when he was a member of the Canadian military and it disputed the newspaper’s suggestion that the former officer’s inexperience disrupted rescue efforts.

“There’s probably going to be a fear that it’s now the Wild West and we can run off and do whatever we want,” said Gerry Nott, the editor in chief of The Ottawa Citizen. “But the decision doesn’t approve recklessness.”

To guide judges and juries, the court laid out a number of signs of responsible reporting, including efforts to obtain comment from all sides of a story.

“This gives journalists a step-by-step test they should follow,” said Mary Agnes Welch, president of the Canadian Association of Journalists and a reporter at The Winnipeg Free Press in Manitoba. “It’s something to hang your hat on.”

The court also offered very broad suggestions for determining if a newspaper article, broadcast news report, blog posting or any other form of communication was in the public interest and thus potentially covered by the new libel defense  regardless of whether its author is a professional journalist. But Mr. Nott acknowledged that this standard might prove to be a matter of further public and legal debate.

“It’s going to have a significant impact on the relationship that exists between the media and the public,” said Ronald F. Caza, the lawyer who represented the former police officer. Mr. Caza said that the subjects of news stories “may have to be very proactive to make sure that relevant information is provided to journalists.”

In the second case, a forestry executive had been awarded $1.42 million after The Toronto Star published an article suggesting that the man had used his friendship and political connections with a former premier of Ontario to essentially circumvent the approval process for reviewing plans to expand a golf course. The addition of six holes to the course required the use of government land and had provoked a battle with neighbors over its environmental impact.