The December 2009 Supreme Court of Canada decision providing the defense of responsible communication on matters of public interest allows journalists (and bloggers) greater freedom from libel and defamation concerns associated with their work. For the most part this is a good thing. Most articles, written by said journalists and independent experts, characterize Justice McLachlin’s decision as a vote for freedom of expression and the prudent modernization of Canada’s out-of-date laws.
It is important to note the distinction between the “public interest” (as used in the court’s decision) versus what “interests the public”. Many of us may be curious about the private life of a CEO, a politician or a celebrity but that does not make it in the public interest. So, media are still not free, legally, to publish any allegation or any “fact” on any topic. All this unfortunately gets decided in court long after the fact. Media decision makers may feel the pressure to appeal to general public’s appetite for the sensational and as such the standard for truth could be lowered.
The new defense is not intended to be a carte blanche to “ruin reputations” nor should it mean it is open season on politicians, business executives and corporations who are, at times, offside with popular opinion or the personal opinion of an activist journalist or blogger. But one can only assume that in the future, there will be more mistakes, not less, than in the past. The onus is on journalists, bloggers and publishers to first ensure their product is both “responsible” and in the “public interest”. Once unsubstantiated information is published, reputations are affected permanently. It is hard, and sometimes impossible, to put the toothpaste back in the tube. False or incorrect allegations stick in the public consciousness even when later “corrected”.
The new norm is to publish fast and online. That means less time for thoughtful consideration of what to publish. The short and long term challenge for public relations advisors (and it is not a new one) is to manage and respond to incorrect information about clients that was published. Mistaken coverage stays online forever, or for at least a very long time and often gets repeated or re-tweeted. When incorrect information gets published, it is often a long term problem.
Mistakes will be made. Hopefully the media will be quick to correct them.
