25-05-2023, 08:48 PM
(25-05-2023, 08:08 PM)Skygeek Wrote:In addition, to quote myself from another thread:(25-05-2023, 07:00 PM)matthieu1221 Wrote: Who would be liable? The guest of course, but would the channel itself be liable to a suit?
Both. It's why - for example - if you tune into paper reviews on other channels, if a paper has been foolhardy enough to publish something libelous (or legally contentious, without right-of-reply to the person concerned), not only would the panel not be allowed to discuss it, the channel wouldn't run it at all - even as part of a summary - because any utterance of a libel (even a presenter saying: "Paper X claims this") would - if it were proven to be libelous - constitute a fresh instance of libel.
Were a misjudgment to be made or a guest were to "go rogue" and say what they wanted against the instruction of producers, both the channel and the guest would be held liable.
It's why producers of such programmes have to be VERY careful.
(22-05-2023, 04:05 PM)bilky asko Wrote: It's important to note that retweets and embeds of a defamatory tweet can be actionable.