media law 5 - readers comments and defamtion Flashcards
what act outlines unmoderated comments?
Regulation 19 of the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002
(part of EU law) offers a defence in respect of unmoderated comments posted
by readers which are in breach of civil or criminal law
EU Electronic Commerce Directive (Regulation 19) says media not liable for
content of statements as long as they….
- Don’t moderate
- Remove comments when alerted
(the offending material must be removed, or
public access to it disabled, ‘expeditiously’ by the website operator - e.g. a media
organisation)
what could be a viable defence against editing of readers comments?
A requirement of the defence is that the offending comment is removed
‘expeditiously’, or public access to it disabled, when a complaint is made
about the comment or the operator
what IPSO clause relates to readers comments?
Clause 1 - accuracy
what are the two parts of defamation?
Libel - the defamation of a person through speech
Slander - the defamation of someone through a permanent form of
communication, i.e. an article.
what are the three things that defamation needs for proof?
- defamatory statement
- That they have been identified
- That it has been published to a third person
how does defamation seriously effect a persons reputation?
- causes them to be exposed to hatred or to be shunned/ avoided
- lowering them in the estimation of society
- Disparaging the person in his/her business or profession
what does section 1 of the 2013 defamation act say?
a statement is not defamatory unless its
publication has caused, or is likely to cause, “serious harm” to a claimant’s
reputation.
Has to have caused the body “serious financial loss”.
what words mean is what a ‘reasonable person’ would think
they mean.
what are the risks of Identifying a person as a suspect in a
criminal investigation
- ## creates an inference of guilty verdict
what are defamtory statements?
published matter which can create inference and
also from lax captioning and use of photos/
footage. - i.e. a defamtory headline
what can a defamatory inference mean?
“A statement with a secondary meaning which can be understood by someone without
special knowledge who ‘reads between the lines’
what do innuendos indicate?
might seem innocuous but defamatory in the eyes of people with special
knowledge - “I saw our editor go into that house on the corner of sleep street”.
what must a libel claimant prove?
1) defamtory statement
2) that they have been reasonably identified
3) published to a third person
what is the test for indentification/ defamation of a group of people?
would the published statement reasonably lead people acquainted with
you to believe you are the person being referred to?
what if a statement individually indentified one person as part of a group?
If a defamatory statement refers to someone being a member of a group, but
includes no other identifying detail of that person, all members of the group can sue
IF the group is sufficiently small
why might somebody be reluctant to take on a defamation case?
Uncertain how the judge will interpret what is written
u Difficult to prove
u Huge damages can be awarded if the case is lost
u Massive legal costs paid by the loser
- It is easier to settle out of court
in a nutshell what does the person claiming have to prove?
- They do not have to prove the statement is false
- The journalist has to prove it is true
- claimant must commence a defamation action within one year of the
publication of the relevant material
what is the benefit of a printed apology?
although you run the risk of repeating the libel it can settle down any imminent threat of a lawsuit
what is a repetition?
a fresh libel - you can make different cases every time even if the same thing is said
what is the single publication rule?
Section 8 of the new act adds in the “single publication” rule for online. - different to written
-But it will not apply if the manner of the subsequent publication is ‘materially
different’ from the manner of the first publication
