Defamation matters, but claimants need to prove they have suffered serious reputational harm: Nicholas Dobson
- In Hegab v The Spectator (1828) Ltd, an article published in The Spectator was found to be defamatory of the claimant at common law.
- But the court found that it caused no serious harm to the claimant’s reputation, and was in any event substantially true and not materially inaccurate.
‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me’ was once a common riposte by children expressing apparent indifference to taunts, insults and verbal abuse. As the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) noted from the Christian Recorder of 22 March 1862: ‘Remember the old adage… True courage consists in doing what is right, despite the jeers and sneers of our companions.’
But if the old maxim is still used in the dangerous age of cancel culture—where even careful talk can cost livelihoods—defamation (with its long history, going back at least to the Statute of Westminster 1275) remains alive and well, giving authors pause for thought. For if ‘fame’ can mean ‘reputation’
