Open field for wild interpretations

For Article: Photoblog Accusations and U.K. Libel Law
Posted by Jane Abao 12/5/2006 6:23:38 AM

"The words published are capable of having a defamatory meaning.”

How do you measure CAPABILITY of words having defamatory meaning?

From whose side will this be measured?
What are the parameters?

It is said that the law of defamation anywhere protects individuals and organizations, granting the injured the right to seek action for the harm done.

It is also recognized that there is no specific legislation addressing the issue of defamation on the web. As each state takes a somewhat different legislative approach to defamation, in establishing such, the first among three requirements in most is that there is defamatory statement (or material) or imputation.

Note that it is stated categorically that the statement or imputation made is defamatory. From here proceeds the proving that indeed there is defamation or there is none.

But looking into CAPABILITY is different. There are no fixtures to speak of. In other words, in here, there is an open field for wild interpretations.

A judge was said to describe a defamatory statement as a statement that is "of a kind likely to lead ordinary decent folk to think less of the person about whom it is made." This applies at examining whether the statement or imputation is defamatory or not. NOT in examining whether the statement is capable of having defamatory meaning or not. There is a world of difference.

If this happens even with what we are supposed to measure injustice with, how then can we aspire for justice if we cannot fix our words?