Online Defamation: Slander or Libel?
Over at Social Media Today, Matt Rhodes found a recent judgment that muddies the water on whether online defamation is slander or libel:
To date it has been thought that defamatory comments in online communities, bulletin boards and other chat on the internet are libel. They are published and a permanent record is kept. That’s why I was intrigued to read a report in OutLaw today of a recent judgement that took the opposing view.
Here’s the comments from Mr Justice Eady who tried the case:
“[Bulletin board posts] are rather like contributions to a casual conversation (the analogy sometimes being drawn with people chatting in a bar) which people simply note before moving on; they are often uninhibited, casual and ill thought out,” he said in his ruling. “Those who participate know this and expect a certain amount of repartee or ‘give and take’.”
“When considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind are much more akin to slanders (this cause of action being nowadays relatively rare) than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions,” said the ruling. “People do not often take a ‘thread’ and go through it as a whole like a newspaper article. They tend to read the remarks, make their own contributions if they feel inclined, and think no more about it.”
The facts of the case are complex and involve multiple parties, so I’d recommend reading the full background on OutLaw here.
Personally, I understand that the difference matters in a legal sense but many times someone accuse of slander counters with “it’s not slander online, it’s libel, so nyah!” and the proceeds to act as if they won the argument when the problem of defamation remains unsolved. But it’s interesting to see a legal precedent and what that might mean for online conversations.
Hi Jason,
Thanks for the mention! I agree that sometimes the slander vs libel argument can overtake the issue of the defamation in the first place.
For us at FreshNetworks, and no doubt other companies who run and manage online communities, the distinction really is important though. If comments are libel then the victim can seek large damages, even if they can’t prove that the comments have caused them any real damage. The onus is on the other party to prove that the comments weren’t defamatory (difficult to do). With slander damages are less easily paid out and the onus is on the victim to prove that they actually incurred loses.
So what does this mean for online conversations? Well most people moderate comments (either pre- or post-) quite strictly and if there is any hint of defamation then the conversation will just disappear. They and the people writing the comments can risk the chance of being sued. So the conversations go and the debate is removed. We never find out if it is defamatory or anything else about the topic being discussed. The community isn’t allowed to resolve the issue themselves.
Matt
FreshNetworks