Legal News

The Shortest Allegedly Defamatory Statement in History?

By Ashby Jones

There should be a television game show, we think, in which contestants vie to see who can defame someone an audience member in fewer words. (”I can defame that man in seven words, Alex!”) We had this silly thought after getting word of a lawsuit out of Cook County, Ill., in which a management company filed a $50,000 lawsuit over a tenant’s “malicious and defamatory” Twitter tweet. Such tweets, as of course you know, LBers, have a maximum length of 140 characters. And yes, apparently they can lead to defamation lawsuits.

The tweet was made by the tenant, Amanda Bonnen, in reference to the state of her apartment to her 20 followers. “You should just come anyway,” it read. “Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it’s OK.”

Click here for the story, from Chicago Bar-Tender (hat tip: ABA Journal). The complaint notes that because Bonnen’s account was public, “anybody in the world can view the account holder’s tweets.” The complaint says that because the “statement damaged the plaintiff’s reputation in its business, the statement is liable per se.”

We’re not defamation experts, but we think that Marian Wang, the author of the item at Chicago Bar-Tender, asks some good questions. Writes Wang:

It begs this question: What IS a tweet anyway? Is it really considered publishing? Is it a conversation between friends in a public forum, like the electronic version of a coffeeshop, where you can gripe privately but have your gripes overheard? No one considers that defamation. And for that matter, does anyone actually claim that one-liners on Twitter are truth? After all, when you tweet, you type into a text box that asks, “What are you doing?” So what does an assertion on Twitter count for, anyway? Isn’t it just an opinion? Isn’t it stream of consciousness? Isn’t it called a Twitter “stream” for a reason?

Our question would primarily concern damages. How might a plaintiff go about proving damages in such a case, where only 20 people were likely to see the tweet (although, yes, because Bonnen’s tweets were public, many more may have seen them)?

Any thoughts, LBers?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on July 28, 2009 (boomark / email).