How Libel and Slander is Handled in PR

   Why I decided to write this blog post:

        Last week I went on a family vacation to Pensacola Florida. On the last day, we visited my older brother Brandon's restaurant that he had just opened up in Perdito on Memorial day. He explained to us that most of the publicity his operation has received has been from positive Google reviews totaling to a 4.6-star rating. There was one lady however who ordered over $100 in food and never picked it up. She left a one-star review and captioned it "Worst pizza I ever put in my mouth". This interested me, and so I decided to look up some reviews from the place I work. Most were reasonable but there was one in particular that stood out where this person posted a picture of one of our sushi rolls that looked like it sat in her fridge for a month commenting that she was served it rancid. 

        The point of this story is that there are instances in which a case can be made where intentional falsehoods/inaccuracies have been publicized by individuals (such as consumers or even competition) to harm a firm's reputation. This is wrong and unjustified because it is deceitful and deceptive by nature. Even from a customer standpoint, hearing about exaggerated fabrications in which fact is separatable from feeling  

could sway you away from a good or service that you would have otherwise enjoyed.

This blog post will cover and respond to these three related questions: 

At what burden would a company or corporation file for a libel or slander lawsuit?

What criteria or degree of burden must be satisfied in order for a business to win compensation for libel and slander cases (compared to traditional ones)?

How does conflict of interest influence these judiciary outcomes?

My response:

         I believe that one thing that is important to highlight in question #1 is that individuals who own or work for a business must come to the decision whether to file for a traditional defamation lawsuit (in which the burden is being alleged on an individual's character) or rather a business disparagement claim/trade libel (where harm is being alleged to a business reputation causing economic disinterest. These burdens must fall under one or several of the following damage classifications: Actual, Special, General, Nomial, and or Punitive. Actual and Special damages can sometimes be categorized together. They seek reimbursements for profit or revenue loss, as well as a drop in stock value. General damages are often associated with non-tangible injuries (to reputation) that caused or led to monetary loss. Nominal damages are when defamation can not be proven but the plaintiff's legal rights were violated. Finally, punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant's behavior often in the case of actual malice and reckless disregard. 

        Journalism and News companies are commonly most associated with business defamation lawsuits because they seek financial compensation for exercising their first amendment rights, which in some cases tests legal boundaries. From what we can understand from high-profile cases such as with the Daily Mail, business defamation lawsuits are difficult for plaintiffs to win because a higher burden of proof is required as opposed to traditional defamation lawsuits. This gets even more complicated when businesses sue other businesses for defamation because people of interest must be identified that made libelous or slanderous statements to a third party.

        To address question #3, conflict of interest typically happens in the workplace. An example of this was around 2017 when Allstate fired 4 of their employees and made false allegations containing sensitive information in their memos which had been sent to hundreds of their coworkers. Illinois courts verdict awarded the plants $27.1 million in damages. Defamation following workplace termination includes but is not limited to sexual misconduct and wrongful hire/fire practices. Some final thoughts that I would like to add are that it is important for both employers and employees to tread lightly and think about the scope of what they can say when representing a business, whether it is a manager addressing the state of a workplace or an employee who was unsatisfied about their employment and left on bad terms. Thank you for reading and I hope that you learned something new about Defamation and how it pertains to business.

-"Meyham" from Allstate commercials