User Awareness of Defamation Associated with Twitter - Literature review Example

User Awаrеnеss of Dеfаmаtiоn Аssосiаtеd with Тwittеr Name Institution Date User Awаrеnеss of Dеfаmаtiоn Аssосiаtеd with Тwittеr Introduction Laws on defamation have, according to Al-Deen and Hendricks (2011), existed so as to vindicate the strong interest of the society in preventing and restoring attacks on reputation1. Stewart (2012) stated that the traditional law on defamation recognized that the society considered reputation as one’s most valuable possession and the individual would have a strong interest in preserving a good name2. While courts have tried to adapt defamation law principles to the internet, the social media has presented new challenges. Gossip that is shared on social media can easily be shared and copied to friends and the whole world and this can be done in much more different contexts than the speaker intended. It is no wonder that Facebook and Twitter have generated defamation lawsuits already. This essay will discuss user awareness of defamation associated with Twitter. Concept description Twitter Lusted (2011) stated that social networking has become a part of people’s daily routines3. From the comfort of their homes, it is possible for people to communicate with thousands of friends through an update on facebook or a post (tweet) on Twitter. Using Twitter, information can be sent to very many people quickly. Twitter can be classified as a form of micro blogging, although the tweets are short and should not be more than 140 characters. By signing up with Twitter, a user can receive and post messages to a whole network of contacts. The messages are supposed to be brief and could be used as a way of gathering or conducting group conversations. In addition to texts, users can also post pictures through a feature called “twitpic”. Another interesting feature is that users can block people they feel are excessive or annoying to them (Lusted, 2011)4. The number of users on Twitter had hit over 500 million by June 2012 and this number is stated to be growing. The number of active users is stated to be 200 million across the world. Lunden (2012) stated that there are about one billion tweets in every 2.5 days and these tweets cover every topic that is conceivable5. The USA tops the list on countries in terms of twitter accounts. The most popular language on twitter is stated to be English, followed by Japanese while Arabic comes at number six. Arabic accounts for 2.8 % of the tweets (Lunden, 2012). Use of social networking for communication has grown greatly. Lusted argued that the growing usage of these medium raises some scepticism since people become more and more isolated from one another and they prefer connecting online (Lusted, 2012). Lusted further argued that fears are created because users become vulnerable to theft of identity, their privacy is threatened and young people are exposed to predators online6. O’Reilly and Milstein (2011) purported that Twitter is a good tool for breaking of news to friends and sharing of experiences7. In fact, the authors stated that since July 2008, Twitter has been the real-time newspaper in the world. For instance, the 2008 Los Angeles earthquake was posted on Twitter and it took only ten minutes for people to be informed of the occurrence (O’Reilly and Milstein, 2011). Twitter can also be used for mind reading as well as mind opening. It enables people to see what and how others are thinking. It also provides details on latest happenings around people, for instance, latest movies, or interesting TV shows8. While on twitter, people are free to post whatever is in their mind. FindLaw Team (2012) stated that the perceived immediateness and anonymity of Twitter has given people the green light to do or say whatever they like about others without reflecting on the consequences that follow outside the internet9. Some of the comments or posts made by people could defame others by making them appear to be less being to the ordinary reasonable person. According to Delta and Matsuura (2011), use of Twitter as a social networking service has grown and interesting cases of defamation have started being generated10. Defamation According to Kelly and Procter (2012), cases on defamation have increased in the UAE and this has been stated to be related to the increasing use of tools for the social media11. Social media is increasingly sweeping the world and people can instantly voice their opinions through Twitter and other social media tools. Since very many people can read a post on twitter at the same time, information that is defamatory can spread at a very fast rate. Shan and Rendle (2012) stated that a statement on Twitter that is defamatory cannot be impervious from legal action12. A tweet that is defamatory, false and cannot be defended has to be traced back to the tweeter and substantial charges made to the tweeter. In fact, even a retweet of a defamatory tweet is considered as a defamatory offence and legal action has to be taken against the tweeter13. McNamara (2007) argued that laws on defamation are meant to protect the reputation of people14. But the law on defamation suffers from one fundamental deficiency; the lack of a principled and theoretically coherent law statement that regards what is defamatory. Rolph categorised one’s reputation as property, dignity and celebrity (Rolph, 2008). The reputation of someone is protected based on imputations made on ones professional honesty and competence. Subjecting one to ridicule s considered as demeaning of their dignity and this is defamatory. With respect to celebrity, it is stated that ones reputation exists because of their relationship with others and it is the people around them that will uphold their reputation (O’Connor, 2011). One case of defamation involved Kim Kardashian who was a celebrity. In this case, someone wrote in an online article that Kim had appeared on a cookie diet that was promoted by Dr. Siegal. Kim responded to this on twitter by stating that the cookie diet was falsely purporting that he was on their diet and that he would never do such an unhealthy diet. He further added that since Dr Siegal had lied about Kim being on their diet, they must have lied on many other occasions unknown to people. Siegal and his distribution company sued Kim for defamation regarding the two tweets. Another case reported is that of Dawn Simorangkir, who is a designer, suing Courtney Love because of posting many defamatory tweets that claimed that Dawn was a felon and stole from Love, has a prostitution record, histories of drug addiction, assault and battery. Love was sued for both defamation and invasion of privacy, together with intentional instilling of emotional harm (Delta and Matsuura, 2011). Twitter is limited to 140 characters, and people might argue that they were misunderstood but the information posted is communicated15. Evaluation methodology Scanlon (2012) presented some instances when a tweet can be considered to be defamatory16. He purported that a tweet can be considered to be defamatory if it lowers the estimation of someone with respect to right thinking society members. A tweet that causes distress or alarm and subsequently harasses someone is also defamatory. In addition, tweets that are false and malicious, intending to harm interests of others are also defamatory. Scanlon (2012) further added that tweets that create fear in someone’s mind, deceptive tweets and impersonating tweets are liable to legal action for defamatory17. Another category includes tweets that are intended to cause intimidation to someone and tweets that reveal personal information. These are also considered to be defamatory tweets (Scanlon, 2012). Previous research done by PostOnline (2012) on user аwаrеnеss of dеfаmаtiоn аssосiаtеd with Тwittеr revealed that more than half of young people recognize the legal implications that are accompanied with online gossip. Wiggin LLP, a media law firm, revealed that 54 % of people aged 18 to 24 were aware that they could get prosecuted if they posted unsubstantiated rumours on someone else’s life (PostOnline, 2012). The research also revealed that 83 % of people over the age of 65 understand that a defamation claim can be charged against them. 42 % of the 18 to 24 age group admitted to considering taking legal action against anyone who posted offensive comments about them. On the other hand, 72 % of the 65 year olds would do same. The number of old people who are aware of defamatory claims and who would launch legal action for defamation is clearly higher than the number of young people. It is no wonder that the number of people actively using Twitter is dominated by young people. Another research was done by Bakshy et al (2009) to find out how informed people were on the uses or misuses of Twitter that could lead to defamation. Majority of the respondents stated that the law was not very clear since people’s posts at times get misunderstood for defamation (56 %). In addition, most of the respondents were inclined to the view that the character limitation on 140 did not give them ample time to explain whatever they meant at times. However, this is arguably Twitter’s strength (Elefant and Black, 2010). Discussion The general indication from the research done is that people use the excuse of misunderstanding when faced with questions on defamation. This should not be the case since books on twitter and the law on defamation present instances when posts can be considered to cause defamation (Chesterman, 1995)18. In addition, the old people seem to take issues on defamation more seriously since they know of the repercussions that at times includes business implications19. It is the old people who also tend to pursue cases on defamation while the youth do not take the issues seriously. This could be attributed to the fact that the youth would prefer engaging more in a string of exchanges while socializing while the older people would take every detail for business (Andrews, 2012)20. However, Huang et al (2009) argued that this does not give the youth the mandate to engage in defamation and the laws set will take effect on them when sued21. Conclusion Use of Twitter has greatly developed in the present communication age and information can spread to very many people when using Twitter and other social media tools. However, people using the tools should be careful on what they write and post since the information could cause harm to other people and this leads to the crime of defamation. The guidelines on behaviors that are considered defamatory should be understood by Twitter users so that they do not commit the crime without their knowledge. It should be recommended that users of Twitter go through the guidelines which should incorporate issues on defamation before they start using the tool for social media. References Al-Deen S. Hana and Hendricks A. John, 2011. Social Media: Usage and Impact. Lexington Books, UK. Stewart Daxton, 2012. Social Media and the Law: A Guidebook for Communication Students and Professionals. Routledge, New York. Delta B. George and Matsuura H. Jeffery, 2011. Law of the Internet. 3rd Ed. Aspen Publishers. USA. FindLaw Team, 2012. Social Media and Defamation. Retrieved on January 7th 2013 from: http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4237/social-media-and-defamation.aspx. Kelly Rebecca and Procter Sharon, 2012. Defamation and Social Media in the UAE. Retrieved on January 7th 2013 from: http://www.ameinfo.com/defamation-social-media-uae--313903. Shan Niri and Rendle Adam, 2012. Think BR: Defamation on Twitter - how to avoid the legal risks. Retrieved on janauary 7th 2013 from: http://www.brandrepublic.com/opinion/1162103/think-br-defamation-twitter-avoid-legal-risks/. Scanlon Luke, 2012. Twitter and the Law: 10 Legal Risks. Retrieved on January 7th 2013, from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/aug/10/twitter-legal-risks. Lusted A. Marcia, 2011. Social Networking: MySpace, Facebook and Twitter. ABCDO. Minnesota. Lunden Ingrid, 2012. Analyst: Twitter Passed 500M Users in June 2012, 140M of Them in US; Jakarta ‘Biggest Tweeting’ City. Retrieved on January 8th 2013 from: http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/30/analyst-twitter-passed-500m-users-in-june-2012-140m-of-them-in-us-jakarta-biggest-tweeting-city/. O’Reilly Tim and Milstein sarah, 2011. The Twitter Book. O’Reilly Media Inc. Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol. O’Reilly McNamara Lawrence, 2007. Reputation and Defamation. Oxford University press. Oxford, NewYork. Rolph David, 2008. Reputation, Celebrity and Defamation Law. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. England. PostOnline, 2012. Over half of young people understand the legal implications of online gossip. Retrieved on January 8th 2013, from: http://www.postonline.co.uk/post/news/2232232/over-half-of-young-people-understand-the-legal-implications-of-online-gossip. Bakshy et al, 2009. Everyone’s an Influencer: Quantifying Influence on Twitter. USA. Elefant Carolyn and Black Nicole, 2010. Social Media for Lawyers: The Next Frontier. American Bar Association. USA. Chesterman, 1995. The Money or the Truth: Defamation Reform in Australia and the USA, 18 University of NSW Law Journal 300. Andrews Lori, 2012. I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did: Social Networks and the Death of Privacy. Goodreads Author, UK. Comres, 2013. Poll-Digest-Social- Wiggin Defamation Poll. Retrieved on January 8th 2013, from: http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/810/wiggin-defamation-poll.htm. Huang et al, 2009. Prolific Resistance: Introduction to Twitter. China. O’Connor E. Ann, 2011. Access to Media All A-Twitter: Revisiting Gertz and the Access to Media Test in the Age of Social Networking. 63 Fed. Comm. L.J. 507. HeinOnline, USA. Read More