Today’s decision by the Supreme Court of Canada about defamation law has shifted the balance from plaintiffs to defendants — in other words, towards greater free speech. The court calls it a modernization, which it is — phenomena like talk radio shows, partisan TV panels and the Internet were not around when defamation law was developing (it actually goes back 400 years). It also brings us more in synch with the U.S. approach to free speech, and breaks away from the European model of soft censorship.
In other words, it should terrify Canada’s human rights commissions. (…)
The decision doesn’t end defamation suits, of course. It merely moves the fulcrum a bit, by widening the scope of what constitutes “fair comment”. Fair comment must still be rooted in true facts; but if those facts are clear, and the defamer’s comments are clearly his own views, the court will give latitude to even “outrageous” and “ridiculous” opinions.
The rule of thumb for writers — and bloggers — remains: get your facts straight. But the good news for free speechniks is that, if your facts are accurate, you can be dramatic, critical and even wrong in your opinions. It’s good news for bloggers — and bad news for censors everywhere.
My NEW book!
Tune in to Sun News!
Rob Ford t-shirts!
NEW from New English Review:
Advertise on this blog!
Reach this blog's 100,000+ unique monthly visitors.
CLICK HERE for ad rates!
- My NEW book: Confessions of a Failed Slut
- ‘Mark Steyn could have not chosen a better lawyer to represent him than (…) Daniel Kornstein.’
- Christopher Hitchens, reconsidered
- Ed Driscoll: By all means, dump Firefox. But then what?
- NSFW: This is a post about porn that all conservatives should read
- Mark Steyn: The tyranny of name recogniton
- Mark Steyn: Defaming [and, apparently, journalism...] for Beginners
- ‘The trouble with Judge Combs Greene’s statement is that it’s rubbish’
- Why Mark Steyn doesn’t have a legal defense drive at KickStarter
- Teri O’Brien’s NEW book: The ABCs of Barack Obama