[carlwaring]

Originally Posted by Russ

Lol is this a mod-only thread or what?? :-)

I wasn't want to say anything

Originally Posted by danielf

Then again, are web masters expected to be the judge of what is defamatory...

There are clear rules as to what is considered a libellous/defamatory comment.

This is an extract from "Essential Radio Journalism" by Paul Chantler & Peter Stewart. (Ch 12, P207)

Anything published which damages someone's reputation is potentially defamatory. Literally this means de-farning someone. Defamation is divided into slander (spoken) and libel (published). All broadcast defamation is defined as libel because broadcast speech is more wide-ranging than normal speech and, because it goes out on the radio via transmitters, is effectively published.

The legal definition of defamation says that something is libellous if it:

o Exposes anyone to hatred, ridicule or contempt.
o Causes anyone to be shunned or avoided.
o Lowers anyone in the estimation of , right-thinking members of society generally'.
o Disparages anyone in their business, trade, office or profession.

Libel is all about the meaning of words or phrases. The test is what a 'reasonable person understands and thinks about those words. This takes into account inference, implication and innuendo. It does not matter whether the person hearing the libel believes it or not. Even a joke can be libellous.

The plaintiff has only to prove that the statement is defamatory, that it refers to him or her and that it was actually broadcast. The plaintiff does not have to prove that the statement did any real damage; it is sufficient that it simply discredits him or her. The main burden of proof is on the defendant (that is you!) who has to show what was said is true or that there is a protection from one of the recognized defences to libel.