Responses to "Defamatory Posts"

[TShame]

Daniel Benson wrote:
"Defamatory posts - some guidelines

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A post will be defamatory if it contains a statement which is untrue and which might cause damage or prejudice to another person's reputation. Because it is published in writing it is called a "Libel".

For a statement to be considered as being true, it must have been accepted as true in a competent court or tribunal or admitted by the person who is the subject of the statement.

Defamatory statements about cyclists are particularly serious as Future's magazines and websites are fairly prominent in the cycling world and are therefore likely to carry influence.

If you post material about doping or other cheating, please do not make allegations in your post. Please do not quote allegations from other sources. Every repetition of a libel is itself a fresh libel.

Posting a link to another source which might contain a defamatory statement is just about acceptable as long as you don't indicate an approval of the statement in your post.

A defamatory statement is only actionable if it is made about an identifiable individual or class of individual. This means that a statement made about a whole team could be actionable by each of the individual members of the team.

Defamatory statements about dead people are not actionable so where a cyclist has drugged himself to death then go ahead and say what you want.

Please understand that dealing with even the threat of a legal action is costly and disruptive. This means that you may feel that moderator action is sometimes over-cautious. "

I will post my response following......

 

[TShame]

While I understand libel and the damage that could be done to someone's reputation, I feel that this 'rule' seems more about protecting Cyclingnews.com from lawsuits and loss of funding than in the morality of free speech.

The main reason no drug accusations should be posted is that it is morally wrong. It could hurt an innocent rider, his friends, his family, his team and sponsors. What company wants to sponsor a rider that 90% of cycling fans feel is cheating under the radar with some illegal doping procedure?

Please, protect the riders by erasing these type of posts. I have repeatedly stated (though not always published) that I do not see the need to allow fan opinions of riders regarding doping, both across the board( 'everyone is blood doping, using epo, etc'.) and on a personal level. A number of past posts have included opinions about Armstrong, Basso, Ullrich, Hamilton, etc.

The 'rules' seem to indicate that those who are found guilty or admit to doping can be discusssed at length; but not any of the others. Does this mean discussion is allowable about Hamilton and Landis and Kohl because they were found guilty by the courts governing cycling; but not individuals like Ullrich and Basso since they neither admitted to using doping products nor were found guilty of having doping products in their blood or urine?

Where should the line be drawn in your opinion? Should doping accusations be reported and removed from this forum?

Also, does anyone agree with Daniel's last statement:"Defamatory statements about dead people are not actionable so where a cyclist has drugged himself to death then go ahead and say what you want."

Shouldn't the reputation of a rider matter even if he is dead? I understand there to be a vast difference in riders who died due to race doping, like Tom Simpson, and hurling accusations against riders who are no longer living and able to defend themselves. I would prefer that 'no doping allegations' be across the board. I think cycling and cyclingnews forum will be better for it. I applaud the efforts to prevent this forum from being a public accusation against the riders it supports.

 

[ElChingon]

If you use the right or carefully thought out language you can pretty much say what you want. The power of suggestion and leading a reader to the punch line can be done without any legal issue because if you don't write it but lead the reader into interpreting it themselves as such, well its the readers fault for thinking it not you for leading them to it. Its just the writer who has no tact that causes the problem.

Many people read the cyclingnews.com news and end up with a mental list of who's doped and who doesn't based on this premise. There are always those who form a different idea of what is written and it is the cause of many a thread debate and flame posting on many forums, all based on news posted on cyclingnews.com, one person's interpretation of the story is not always everyone else's same assumption and vice versa.

This is a big reason mass media is now prized by the powerful because if you read something even un-truthful it can be read as the truth if stated correctly. Ever hear of the work "spin".

 

[TShame]

I disagree.
If someone says. "Rider A won a race without getting caught, he was too fast compared to past results; therefore the conclusion is obvious." This is still a wrongful accusation even though the word 'drugs' or 'epo' was never used. If you have your own opinion about a rider, why share that with others if it is negative view? If you have real evidence contact the authorities. Don't post it here. That is the rule.

My questions, for your replies:

Where should the line be drawn in your opinion?

Should doping accusations be reported and removed from this forum?

Shouldn't the reputation of a rider matter even if he is dead?

 

[ElChingon]

My questions, for your replies:

Where should the line be drawn in your opinion?

As in reality and life in general you cannot draw a solid line on the matter because as humans everyone makes mistakes, and I don't mean that doping is a mistake or accident. People might see things and lead to discussion on the matter, just look at the Rasmussen case, Delgado went off on how he saw him in Italy prior to the Tour when he was supposed to be in Mexico. If Delgado was not allowed to say that would the UCI of figured it out? (I think it was Delgado, I could be wrong) Discussion of the athletes is what this whole news media interface between fan and athlete is all about. Sure the modern writings draws greatly on the negative as news but that is really the fault of the writer/reporter/editor, not the fan/athlete. I would hope the days of reporting on the race tactics and rider version of events in the race would come back.

Should doping accusations be reported and removed from this forum?

Why? It is part of life, if the riders did not dope in the first place we wouldn't be talking about it, if the riders choose to dope and get caught it will only lead to us discussing it here. The day the riders only race will we only discuss race related news, which I deeply wish we were.

Shouldn't the reputation of a rider matter even if he is dead?

Well yes and no, it all depends on your beliefs I think, and one cannot push ones beliefs on the rest. We will talk about riders from here to eternity on the things they accomplished and the things they did wrong. Does the "eternal second" deserve to be talked about as the "eternal second"? All depends on your perspective, some will be offended at the nickname others not.

All in all, you cannot stop the discussions in hopes of not offending one person or a group, it is the nature of discussion. I do agree the people who know that it is only a discussion and not a law (our posts) will continue to discuss and not get into personal attacks (aka flame posts). The few who think because we are discussing it that it is so and are outraged at the thought, well they need to remember it is a discussion not a law or truth.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

how did i end up in this topic?

nvm. (edit)

 

[taiwan]

how did i end up in this topic?

nvm. (edit)

Me too, weird.