FOR two years The Herald and Scottish PEN, the freedom of expression organisation, have been campaigning for reform of Scotland’s antiquated defamation laws.
We believe that the current draconian rules are having a chilling effect on Scottish journalism. We know from colleagues, especially on smaller newspapers, that the rich and powerful are able to use even the threat of vexatious litigation to stop embarrassing truths being told.
This is serious enough. However, our campaign, called Freedom of Speech, is not, and has never been, solely about news organisations.
In this internet age, we have all become publishers. A careless tweet, a Tripadvisor review or a Facebook posting could take the individual into a costly court battle, even if that person is in the right.
It is not even necessary to have written the offending content. Ask Paulo Quadros. Last year we revealed that Mr Quadros was facing an action over the content of a local community’s Facebook page, which he moderated, after one critic took some posts to be defamatory speculation. Today we report that Andy Wightman, a land campaigner and journalist who is now a Green MSP, is facing a £750,000 potential lawsuit for something he wrote a year ago.
Mr Wightman has broken his silence on his ordeal, which today would have been over had he been fortunate enough to live under England’s more liberal system.
That is because English authorities have imposed a one-year time bar on such actions.
Crucially, Mr Wightman, who has been supported by Scottish PEN, did not publish his allegedly defamatory comments in a newspaper. His remarks were made in a blog. He does not have the commercial and legal support of a large news-gathering machine such as the BBC or The Herald.
There are moves afoot to reform Scotland’s defamation laws. This is, of course, welcome. But we believe any change must not just be for the benefit of traditional journalists. New laws must also protect campaigners, bloggers and even tweeters who provide information in the public interest.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel