Re: British libel law strikes again

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Scott Brim <swb () employees org>
Date: May 9, 2009 9:56:32 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
Subject: Re: [IP] British libel law strikes again

It seems to me that a "comment" is an expression of an opinion, while
a "statement of fact" is an assertion that something is objectively
true.  Mr Singh's statement, "This organisation is the respectable
face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus
treatments", is clearly phrased as a statement of fact.

This has nothing to do with the efficacy of chiropractic -- if he
makes a assertion of fact he must justify it.

> From: "Wendy M. Grossman" <wendyg () pelicancrossing net>
> If it stands, the ruling is bad enough for Singh, who will have to
> pay the BCA's costs. But it will have an even more terrible effect
> on critiquing anything to do with pseudoscience or alt-med: talk
> about  chilling effects.

Not at all -- it will have a chilling effect on sloppy use of words,
and require all sides to use them responsibly, and to avoid
emotion-laden rhetoric.  Those who want to deny any claim to
usefulness for such things as chiropractic should by all means
continue their challenges but do so constructively ... regardless of
how the other side behaves.

Scott




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com