With the emergence of new media platforms such as blogs, Twitter, Youtube and Facebook, it has become easier for people to communicate information, as well as their own opinions and insights, through user generated content (UGC). These social media tools are easy to use, and can reach out to an extremely wide audience due to the nature of the Internet. In using them, users have to be careful that they are not inadvertently defaming someone with the content that they are putting out.
In other cases, such acts of defamation – also known as libel – may be deliberate. Because it is so easy to make comments or express opinions using new media tools, there are many instances where users deliberately post negative or malicious comments that can cause harm to a person’s reputation.
Libel is therefore something that occurs in new media, whether through ignorance or through intent, and it is something that we all need to watch out for if the Internet is to be a platform for a civil sharing of ideas.
What is libel?
Libel is the act of making a statement that can create a negative image of a person, a business, an organization or even a government. It includes disparaging comments that are spoken, published or communicated in any other form to an audience.
Under the law, someone is guilty of libel if:
1) The statement that he made is false, and
2) The statement caused harm to the victim’s reputation.
When is an opinion considered libelous?
A lot of UGC is about sharing opinions about a subject or an issue. Blogs, for example, provide Netizens with a platform to air their views about almost any topic under the sun.
The question that arises is: Whether a negative opinion can be considered libel?
The short answer is “no”. According to the website Internet Law Focus (http://www.wave.net/immigration/lawyer/libel.html), “Statements of Opinion and not fact are generally immune from Libel. That's because an opinion can never be proven false.”
However, if your opinion is based on potentially libelous facts, then the opinion itself could be considered libelous. As explained in the website: “For instance, stating that a certain business in your opinion "is a fraud" implies that you know of some facts indicating the business has committed fraud. On the other hand, stating, "I don't like that business' product" is merely expressing your individual tastes which is not Libel.”
Alleged libel in the use of social media
1) The Caustic Soda case
In May 2005, the blog Caustic Soda was removed after it was being found guilty of defaming a government agency in one of its posts. The blog has since been replaced with a single-page apology for the post. In it, Chen Jiahao, a 23-year-old postgraduate student who was posting from the United States, said: "I recognise and accept that a number of statements were defamatory of A*Star, its chairman, Mr Philip Yeo, and its executive officers." (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2005/may/09/singaporelibel)
2) The case against Gopalan Nair
In June 2008, news agencies Agence France-Presse and Reuters reported that blogger Gopalan Nair had been arrested on charges of insulting a Singaporean judge during a high-profile libel case involving Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. According to AFP, Nair accused Judge Belinda Ang of “prostituting herself” while overseeing the defamation case. The comment was allegedly made in an e-mail sent to Ang, and in a commentary headlined “Judge Belinda Ang’s Kangaroo Court”, which was published on his blog, Singapore Dissident. (http://cpj.org/2008/06/singapore-detains-us-blogger-over-libel-commentary.php)
The implications
One concern that arose in relation to the Caustic Soda case is that the Singapore government may be making use of libel as a way of policing social media, similar to how it is perceived to be inhibiting criticism in traditional media and other platforms. According to the Reuters report, the group Reporters without Borders ranks Singapore among the 20 lowest-scoring countries in the world in its press freedom index.
Similarly, the case against Gopalan Nair was seen in some quarters as an example of “the Singapore government’s ongoing commitment to silencing opposition voices both in print and online”. Commenting on the case, Bob Dietz, Asia Programme Coordinator for the non-government organization Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), said the detention of Gopalan Nair for public comments about a highly politicized case was “completely unwarranted” and that “freedom to criticize the judiciary is fundamental to a modern society”. (http://cpj.org/2008/06/singapore-detains-us-blogger-over-libel-commentary.php)
Post responsibly
Libel is something that can happen to any of us - whether you commit libel, or you are a victim.
To avoid committing libel inadvertently, we must first understand what constitutes libel before posting or sharing content. Ignorance should never be an excuse.
Avoid disseminating unsubstantiated rumors, unless whatever you say can be backed up by facts that can be proven.
Following these broad guidelines will prevent us from falling into the libel trap.
No comments:
Post a Comment