Page 1 of 1

Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:48 pm
by Hairyloon
`If an assertion of fact is posted on t'internet alongside a picture of a person, it gives the impression that that person asserted that fact.
Is that impression enough to give rise to a claim of defamation?

Image

Obviously not in this example...

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:56 pm
by atticus
If I post a wise saying next to a picture of you, why do you regard that as defamatory, even if the juxtaposition does appear odd?

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 3:19 pm
by atticus
That said, defamation by insinuation is possible. Ask Sally Bercow.

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:17 pm
by Hairyloon
atticus wrote:If I post a wise saying next to a picture of you, why do you regard that as defamatory, even if the juxtaposition does appear odd?


Wisdom is not always nice.
One might, for example, post some of Goebbels thoughts on lies next to almost any politician you care to mention.
Whether the inference is that they said it, believe it or act on it, could be considered defamatory.

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 5:34 am
by dls
Juxtaposition can certainly enough be enough. However the false association has to be between a person and defamatory material, and the context cannot (as in the positing posting) be self contradicting.

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:44 am
by diy
Dave Goreman did a show on how far you can go within the law. Took a picture of a member of the audience, got them to sign a release for £50 and the associated negative activity with the picture.

Re: Implied defamation?

PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:13 pm
by atticus
Indeed, we lawyers always recommend our clients to obtain a release before they defame someone. At fifty quid a go, they are great value.

Why not buy one as a Christmas gift for that special person?