Avoiding libel in satire

Avoiding libel in satire

 

Some notes I have gleaned from various websites, which may be useful to other bloggers.

 

Discerning readers will note that "News from Nowhere", with its surrealist slant, fits all the points given. Unless like Malaisey's "Evidential Rule", ours is three foot long, wooden, hinged in two places. Or our sunken road is already sunk and flooded like theirs! But I don't think so somehow!

• Use of an irreverent tone will signal that the story is not straight news.
• Consider the context of the publication the story will run in, including whether the publication has a history of satire or parody. The Wall Street Journal should be more careful than Mad Magazine.
• Use of an unorthodox headline will alert readers from the beginning that the story is not straight news.
• Unbelievable or outrageous items in the story, experts or groups with names that are ridiculous or have a silly acronym, and quotes that are unbelievable, illogical or over-the-top may all signal that a story is not stating actual facts.
• Instead of using the names of actual people, consider using fictitious names that are close to or suggest real people.
  
  
• In a recent case in America, a libel case was thrown out on the following grounds:
  
  Satire, the court noted, is important to political debate because it is usually directed at public figures and "it tears down facades, deflates stuffed shirts, and unmasks hypocrisy." More generally, the court observed that humor "is an important medium of legitimate expression" and that "defamation claims involving humor . . . raise important issues pertaining to free speech."
  
  For any publication to have a defamatory meaning, it must be capable of being understood by a reasonable reader as stating actual facts. As the court held, a reasonable reader "does not represent the lowest common denominator," but is a person of "reasonable intelligence and learning."
  
  Looking at the entirety of the Observer article, the court concluded that it contained "such a procession of improbable quotes and unlikely events that a reasonable reader could only conclude that the article was satirical" and did not state actual facts.
  
  
  Links:
  http://www.rcfp.org/news/mag/28-4/lib-avoiding.html
  http://www.gannett.com/go/newswatch/2004/september/nw0917-9.htm