Want to stay current on e–commerce law? Sign up for Email Newsletter.
Blogs as a Cooling Environment for Defamatory Statements?
In Baglow v. Smith, 2011 ONSC 5131, a decision by the Superior Court of Ontario released on August 30, 2011, Annis J. dismissed an action for defamation by way of a summary judgment. The defamation action was brought by plaintiff Baglow in response to a statement made by one of the defendants, Smith, in the comments section of the political blog FreeDominion. Baglow and Smith had engaged in a heated debate in the comments section of a number of political blogs including FreeDominion. The back and forth touched on a number of issues including the case of Omar Khadr. In the course of this exchange, Smith referred to Baglow as “one of the Taliban’s more vocal supporters.” Baglow asked Mark and Connie Fournier, the owners of FreeDominion, to remove the comment containing this statement from the blog and they refused to do so. Baglow then proceeded to sue both Smith and the Fourniers. The parties were in substantial agreement over the facts of the case. For additional information, please visit
In granting the motion for summarily dismissing the action, Annis J. made a number of potentially important observations about the application of defamation law to blogs. He rejected the claim that Smith’s comment is properly understood as a statement of fact about Baglow being a Taliban supporter. Read within the context of an ongoing discussion thread, the statement amounted to an opinion about the effect of Baglow’s view on the Omar Khadr case. Further, Annis J. found that the statement would not impugn Baglow’s reputation. In the context of a discussion thread on a political blog replete with insults, this statement is properly understood as the opinion of one side of the debate about the proper treatment of the Omar Khadr case. As such, the statement does not have the necessary ‘sting’ to diminish the reputation of the plaintiff.
Annis J. further emphasized the significance of the context of a live debate forum that creates the opportunity for back and forth rejoinders between the parties. In this context, Baglow’s ability to deflect Smith’s statement by an effective response was part of the rules of the game and an important factor in deciding whether the statement could be derogatory. The court’s focus on placing the defendant’s statement within the context of a political blog and the implications of the contextual analysis in every stage of the decision highlights the potential difficulties facing similar defamation actions originating in from blogs in Canada.
https://service.clearservice.com/itcan/campaignimages/1/www/newsletters/092211.pdf