No. of Recommendations: 3
TMFSpirit wrote:
I think that after the long ordeal the nation endured during the Paula Jones case and Clinton's impeachment hearings, the words Libel and Slander were almost rendered obsolete. ...So, I have to lay a lot of the blame on the media, not Yahoo as some have suggested, because if you can say and write such strong statements, some of which were proven false, about an American President, calling an analyst goofy, a loser or even evil seem rather mild.

Uh, there's a big difference in the ridicule of a public figure, especially public officials, and a private citizen. Such shenanigans may very well have jaded us to the terms libel and slander. It may be that the general public's notion of acceptable demeaning language has changed; but, that is not a defense.

The cocktail hour conversation defense I believe is attributable to whooshing. It's an interesting concept and will very likely make it difficult for the plaintiffs to prove damages. How can there be damages, if the alleged defamations are not taken seriously?

Of course, a message board, while like a conversation is not merely a verbal exchange. What we write remains available and searchable for an undetermined period of time. It becomes an extended record and a resource used by reporters, investigators and the public.

The fact that someone has filed a lawsuit is not surprising. I have expected this to happen for some time. If we were at a cocktail party, would we repeat some of the things written in message boards, or chat rooms in earshot of the targeted individual? The long-lasting nature of posts are the near equivalent. Surprised that somebody got irate about what they read about themselves? I'm not. Amazed that a company might defend their reputation, or the reputation of their representative? I'm not.

I've been looking for a place to jump in on this conversation. I think a careful reading of Mr. Barker's (TMF Max) article will show he has not chosen sides on the question of the specific case at all. I think it was a good article, and well thought out.

The questions about what constitutes due diligence do not apply (IMHO), since he did not in fact specifically comment on the merits. The focus of the article was about freedom of speech, and criticism of ideas without slander.

There is a difference between criticizing analysts for what they say, and alleging abuse or malintent. Civilization demands that we know the difference.
Print the post  


What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.