The aim of the article is to establish, based on the position of the judicature and the views of the doctrine, the content of the concept of special diligence indicated in art. 12 sec. 1 of the Press Law, the obligation to exercise due diligence in collecting and usage
press materials. The article highlights the differences in the understanding of “best endeavours” in relation to many professions, especially medical professions, and “due diligence” imposed on journalists. The content of Art. 355 § 2 of the Civil Code as specifying what the diligence is expected from professionals. It was considered whether the exercise of “due diligence” in collecting the materials would exclude the unlawfulness of the journalist’s actions, if it turned out that, despite this diligence, false information
was provided. The effects of failure to exercise due diligence in the matter of journalist’s liability were discussed, based on the analysis of jurisprudence that due diligence is required at all stages of collecting and usage press materials. The problem of due diligencewas confronted with the journalist’s actions in defense of an important social interest, and finally the scope of the due diligence required from a journalist was presented