There’s an incredible Native American museum near Foxwood (in fact, I think they’re both part of the Pequot-managed business cooperative there). Definitely worth a visit, IMO.

The discussion on the ins and outs of defamation’s been really interesting, and educational.

Say my personal blog, for example. I have a small amount of readership (perhaps 300 people per day) as opposed to my book blog where I have a larger amount of readership (say 1000 people per day…just pulling numbers out of nowhere, just FYI), does it matter? Am I still considered a “public” figure?

Troubled soul singer Amy Winehouse was voted No. 2 because of her “hemorrhaging translucent skin, rat’s nest mane and lashes that look more like surgically attached bats”.

Madonna was identified with a “mug that looks Euro-sealed to her skull, and you’ve got Willem Dafoe with hot flashes.”

These are definitely opinions. I think the only time that “opinions” could become defamatory is when they become “obscene” as discussed in the Falwell v. Hustler case.

If you view free speech as a big circle, defamation decreases the size of the circle. The court doesn't want that and would rather have individuals rebut each other's statements (actually increase the circle) than limit people's speech (which decreases the circle).

I just wanted to pull this out and highlight it because I think it’s such a good illustration of the free speech – defamation continuum.

Being called a “fool” is not provable and therefore is an opinion. What about racist? I'm assuming there is a legal criteria for the term “racist” or “racist statements”.

If you go back and read the post from last week, Jane addresses this question, citing judicial opinion that it’s generally not defamatory to accuse someone of racism, in part because of the multiple definitions that abound for the term.

Now, are college professors public figures? Is a review of them on a public forum, using malicious terms slander or libel (I'm forgetting which is which). In any case, it's up there for the world to see.

I know that students can sue universities under certain circumstances, but I’m not sure if there are limitations against faculty suing students, even in a private action like defamation (especially in a learning-related environment where the learning environment could be so easily compromised by a professor suing a student). That’s an interesting question. In any case, are the thing being said related to the classroom environment, or is it stuff about their personal lives? It seems to me that would make a difference, as well.

Now, are college professors public figures? Is a review of them on a public forum, using malicious terms slander or libel (I’m forgetting which is which). In any case, it’s up there for the world to see.

There is a place for professors to “write back” and would that be the place to prove the words are not true?

I realize that as a writer putting work out into the universe, one opens up herself to criticism. But being called a hack and having my breasts critiqued seems to go beyond what might be expected. In any case, my reaction is to not react. Certainly trying to sue someone seems to put energy into something I want to simply fade away.

I don’t know. We can be mean to each other and unfair and rude and cruel in so many public ways these days. A scarlet A is nothing!

Jessica

Link here.

(s)he said/(s)he said… or maybe I’m oversimplifying.

More recently, someone called me a liar for saying I did not moderate comments and I did. At the time I made the statement that we did not moderate comments, that was true. During the thread about race, I did start moderating comments.

I am pretty sure that a court would find that I was not and am not a liar and that to call me one is defamatory per se.

Is this a hypothetical Shiloh?

Absolutely a hypothetical Shiloh. ;) It’s less confusing for me than person a, person b, meangrrl b and meangrrl t…

Calling someone a liar, when they are not, could also be defamatory per se.

Speaking just in general, couldn’t something like that be hard to prove?

Off topic and not about the kitty. Connecticut, Nora?

Lying about someone’s criminal record, i.e., calling a person a thief or maybe even a criminal, would likely be defamatory. Calling someone a liar, when they are not, could also be defamatory per se.

Hey, 17 comments and no one has hijacked the thread.

Jackie… careful… you’ll jinx it. ;)

A public official, like the mayor, has to prove not only are the statements “facts” v. “opinions” but also that the facts are “untrue” and that the statements were made with “malice.”

So technically, since this is all opinion… IE: Shiloh thinks person X is a fool, or Shiloh says person X is a fool, there’s not much that can be done, right? Because this is my opinion.

But if I went out and lied, saying that person X was a psychotic dangerous fool with a criminal record, this is different. Because these are things that can be proven in a court of law, or disproven. Right?

Am I getting it or am I lost?