How Does the Libel Law Apply to Bloggers?

Posted on February 4th, 2010. Written by Rico.

According to a very informative interview posted by Juned, potentially severely.

Juned interviewed Alex Villafania, who “previously worked for Inquirer.net and is now finishing his graduate studies”. The money quote about blogging and libel:

Still, bloggers can still enjoy their freedom. but to avoid legal inconveniences, i would suggest that bloggers, on a broader sense, should stick to ethical standards of writing, just as they have to follow the standards of grammar and spelling. It is not one for a blogger to destroy the reputation of another person without duly presenting the right evidence. Bloggers are also citizens and as such, must exercise responsibility in their actions. There are many rules that are being developed among blogging communities but one important rule is to be accountable for your statements.

Amen. So I now wonder why “Ella Rose” didn’t bother backing up her statements officially?

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at 12:35 pm and is filed under Analysis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Rico

Rico Mossesgeld is the founding editor of Technograph. Learn more about him at rico.mossesgeld.com/about.

http://www.pmptoday.com/ BrianB

The man was just making a general, non-committal statement.

Just so you’d know, an ordinary, private individual has a lot more rights compared to public official, who is encumbered by her station in many ways.
http://www.pmptoday.com/ BrianB

I also find it hard to believe that you missed a more important quotation:

“Alex: Here’s a definition of libel from the revised penal code –”A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect,real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.”

This law is very vague and only a few libel cases have led to conviction. The merits of these decisions are also in question. Take note also that this law is outdated, even by media standards. It is based on the revised penal code of 1930s, predating World War 2 and certainly before digital media.

Let me emphasize that libel has certain elements before it can become a full judicial case, one of which is intent of malice. Many journalists get away with libel because they are able to produce factual data that are basis for their stories.”

The photos were more than enough as basis for an opinion. So it proved out of context, so mali–araw araw may mali sa dyaryo, radio at TV–pero may basis ang statements.

At makinig ka sa AM radio. Araw araw may minumurang tao, tinatawag gago at baliw. Napaka-out of proportion ng libel case against that blogger ella. Tapos galing pa sa public official.
http://www.pmptoday.com/ BrianB

And the idea that you kept repeating that ella rose did not back up her statement is obviously wrong dahil may photos.

Ano ang basis mo sa statement na yan? Wala ba talagang basis sa paningin mo ang opinion ni ella? Di mo nakita ang photo? Pinatulan nga ng mga newspapaers at TV eh, so ibig sabihin may basis ang accusation maski papaano. Diba?

http://technogra.ph Rico

BrianB, right now I’m actually flip-flopping on whether the Cabral was right to file libel against Ella. On one hand, you’ve got reports from the NBI that she didn’t show up to make an official statement regarding her post, which was an opportunity for her to make her proof “legit”, by making it part of the authoritative public record. On the other hand, some part of me thinks that the suit is a punitive action against someone who dared to call out the government for incompetence.

One thing however is constant in my mind: based on what Alex said—that bloggers can improve their chances against libel by backing up their statements—I theorized that Ella could’ve saved herself a lot of trouble if she met her appointments with the NBI.

http://www.pmptoday.com/ BrianB

I am actually arguing that Cabral was already in the wrong by taking legal steps. She shouldn’t have even contemplated it against one person, a person she has no personal relation to. Ella wasn’t her professional rival, ella didn’t have any personal involvement with her, ella was an ordinary volunteer with a simple person’s eyes.