With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". protected by the First Amendment. For these reasons, I would conclude that Instruction No. 17 misstated the applicable law. I would remand for retrial of the IED issue without affording Leykis the protection of the ruling that Carpenter is a public figure. 1 . 485 U.S. 46, 108 S.Ct. 876, 99 LEd.2d 41 (1988). 2 . Whether Carpenter is a public figure is a question of law that we decide de novo. Mount Juneau Enters., In (citing Wolston, 443 U.S. at 167-68, 99 S.Ct. 2701). 13 . Gertz, 418 U.S. at 351-52, 94 S.Ct. 2997. Our previous cases concluding that a person had become a limited-purpose public figure all involved situations in which the person made public expressions of opinion or sought public approval. See Mount Juneau Enters., Inc. v. Juneau Empire, 891 P.2d 829, 835 (Alaska 1995) (<HOLDING>); Beard v. Baum, 796 P.2d 1344, 1353 (Alaska

A: holding that public meeting did not satisfy public participation requirement because public did not receive adequate notice
B: holding that a soccer player was a public figure within the local sports community
C: holding that tramway project developer who voluntarily sought public approval of project was public figure
D: holding that former state transportation department employee who brought allegations of departmental corruption to public attention was public figure
C.