Freedom of tweets - hopefully a solved problem

The editor-in-chief of The Australian, Chris Mitchell, says he will sue journalism commentator Julie Possetti for defamation after she tweeted the allegedly false claim that for political reasons he stifled debate on man-made climate change at the paper. The details of the story are at Crikey.

Jay Rosen asks "what newspaper has ever revealed itself to be such a threat to freedom of the press as The Australian?", and j-blogger Jonathon Oakes calls it "a ridiculous vanity suit", pointing to a recent pattern of The Australian squabbling with the internet. 

Happily, freedom of tweets is pretty much a solved problem, as we saw with the #iamspartacus response to the Twitter Joke Trial. And while I can't quite claim to be going first, since blogger Syd Walker has already reproduced the allegedly defamatory tweet on her blog, I'll happily take the honour of going second.

A few points of interest about the case.

Possetti did not make the claim, merely reported a claim allegedly made by Asa Wahlquist, a freelance journalist who until a month ago worked for the Australian. Wahlquist is reported to have said all this during a panel debate at the JEAA annual conference - and therefore presumably in front of at the very least dozens of witnesses - but now says she was "quoted inaccurately and taken out of context". According to, erm, The Australian, there's a tape of the proceedings so the combination of a tape and dozens of witnesses should at least make that element of the case pretty easy to resolve.

Mitchell, who is bringing the case, claims "there is not protection from the law in repeating accurately allegations falsely made." I am by no means an expert on Australian media law, but just for the record here's a potentially relevant subsection in the defamation law in question highlighted by Viveka Weiley

It is a defence to the publication of defamatory matter if the defendant proves that the matter was, or was contained in, a fair report of any proceedings of public concern

The definition of "proceedings of public concern" includes "the proceedings of a learned society" and "the proceedings of a trade association", into both of which categories the Journalism Education Association of Australia seems to fall. Implying, perhaps, that there is protection in law for precisely this eventuality.

There's already a Facebook group supporting Possetti as well as a tshirt, and with the odd exception the mood on Twitter is generally supportive too, with #twitdef trending in Sydney during the last few hours. But freedom of tweets is and should be a solved problem, if we're all Spartacus again.

Comments

[Jonathon Oake]

You'll be amused by the latest developments: a tweeter called @JonPowles used the 'I Am Spartacus' method, except replacing Australian newspaper with Robin Hood Airport ...
Apparently he received a phonecall from the Australian's Media Editor letting him know the matter has been referred to police
!
See tweetstream: http://twitter.com/#!/JonPowles

[seamusmccauley]

Jonathon - yup, saw that this morning. Amazing how people seem unaware of recent news, apparently even when it has been reported at some length in the very section of the paper they edit!