New Facebook Privacy Settings-Are You Now A Publisher Or A Public Figure?

Copyright © 2011 Cary J. Calderone

This calls for a quick overview of Libel Law 101.   A publisher has standards for accuracy or else they can be sued for defamation and other things (see Description at Student Press Law Center).  There are things you can do to limit your exposure to legal action, by following certain protocols and guidelines.  For example, you have heard the phrase, "the truth is an absolute defense."  This may save you from a legal action for libel.   But, unfortunately, sometimes publishing the "truth" can expose you to other legal claims, like invasion of privacy.  This is especially so when the items published are, in fact, true, and perhaps, a tad unsavory.  However, there may be a defense for that too, if you happen to publish these unsavory truths about a public figure.   Public figures are pretty much considered fair game, or, at least at a level where even if you publish something about them, even with some non-truths or inaccuracies, you will be held to a more lenient standard.   At this point you may be a bit confused by this area of law and are thinking that you would never consider yourself a publisher anyway?  You don't even have a blog.   So why worry?  No reason, unless you happen to be on Facebook or another Social Media site and have a lot of friends, followers, or the newly created category of "Subscribers."

"ISSA: Emails Prove Holder Knew" and Other DRED Headlines

Sometimes a headline can be a DRED story in and of itself.  Today, while browsing the internet, I saw a headline that said "Issa: Emails Prove Holder Told About Fast And Furious."   I could not help noticing how frequently we see those two words, emails and prove, together in a headline?   By Googling "emails prove" it came up with 45,900 results.  The list included story headlines with names like, Eric Holder, President Obama, Sarah Palin, Mark Zuckerberg and British Petroleum-and that was just on the first page of results.  Do you still think it is acceptable to treat your email as non-records, non-information, and, nonchalantly?