MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI.

Economics Project Semester 1

Title: Social Media and Defamation
Submitted to – Prof. SAJID SHEIKH
Submitted on – 10/11/2023
Submitted by – Krishna Kasawar (2023048)
Year – 1st (Semester 1)
Section – A

1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL MEDIA

2. INTRODUCTION TO DEFAMATION AND ITS ELEMENTS

3. DEFENCES FOR DEFAMATION?

4. TO WHAT EXTENT ARE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS HELD LIABLE

FOR DEFAMATORY CONTENT PUBLISHED BY THEIR USERS?

5. What are the legal challenges in defining and proving defamation in the context

of social media platforms?

6. What are the implications of anonymous posting and fake profiles on social

media platforms for defamation cases?

7. METHODOLOGY

8. CONCLUSION

9. REFERENCES

2|Page
INTRODUCTION
Social media has fundamentally changed how people connect, communicate, and exchange
information in communities, businesses, and individual users. It refers to online resources and
programs that let users interact socially with other users and produce, publish, and share
information. At its core, social media is characterized by its interactive nature, allowing users
to actively participate by sharing their thoughts, opinions, photos, videos, and other forms of
content. It provides a digital space for people to connect, engage in discussions, and build
communities based on shared interests, experiences, or goals.
The emergence of social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn,
YouTube, and Twitter, has enabled the global sharing of knowledge. These platforms let users
find and connect with people and organizations throughout the world as well as maintain
relationships with friends, family, and coworkers. Social media provides a number of
advantages and chances. It enables people to share their ideas, express who they are, and
display their talents. It provides users with access to a diverse array of content and viewpoints
while also acting as a news and information source. Furthermore, social media has developed
into a potent marketing and advertising tool for companies, helping them more successfully
connect and interact with their target market.
It is imperative to acknowledge that social media poses distinct issues and considerations.
Social media's viral and fast-paced nature can occasionally cause rumors, fake news, and
disinformation to spread quickly it is a type of defamation and its very important. As
consumers engage with different online communities and disclose personal information,
privacy and data security become ever more important considerations. Social media is a
powerful tool that has redefined the way individuals, businesses, and institutions
communicate and interact with each other. However, its widespread use has also given birth
to a host of legal challenges, one prominent among these being defamation.
There are a few variables that affect the connection between defamation and social media.
Users can share their opinions, personal comments, and product or company reviews on
social media networks. While these platforms promote free expression, they also provide a
venue where libellous content may be quickly shared and reach a vast audience in seconds.
Before the digital era, such a situation was unheard of, and regulations are still adjusting to
this new reality.
The wide reach and permanency of content on social media has significantly amplified the
impact of defamatory statements. A person's reputation can be tarnished almost
instantaneously, and once the content is out there, it can be challenging to control its spread,
making damages caused by defamation more severe and far-reaching compared to other
forms of media. In terms of legal liability, the person who made the original defamatory
comment is usually held responsible. However, in certain cases, even social media platforms
can be held liable if they fail to take down defamatory content upon receipt of a legal notice.
For instance, as per Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, intermediaries may
not be liable if they merely facilitated the transmission of the defamatory content, provided

3|Page
they comply with due diligence and intermediary guidelines, and act to remove unlawful
content upon notification.
However, situations can become complex when free speech intersects with defamation.
Freedom of Speech, a central tenet of democratic societies, should ideally coexist with the
law of defamation, both aiming at a balanced society where one can express views freely
without inflicting harm on others' reputations. The challenge here lies in striking this delicate
balance. The advent of social media has certainly complicated the defamation landscape. As
law adapts to cyberspace's peculiar dynamics, it must address these challenges with a delicate
balance between protecting individual reputations and upholding the principles of free
speech. It is an evolving field with each case contributing significantly towards shaping the
law relating to social media and defamation.

DEFAMATION
Defamation is defined as a statement that harms the reputation of a third party. Any untrue
statement about a person that harms their reputation is taken into consideration Defamation
comes in two flavours. Defamation can take many forms, the first being spoken statements
such as slander, which includes spreading untrue rumours or disparaging remarks about
someone, and written statements such as libel, which includes publishing false statements in
books, magazines, newspapers, online publications, or other written forms. State laws
pertaining to common law and statutes regulate defamation cases, and there are variations in
state regulations on defamation and possible damages. Defamation is a complex area of the
law because it can be hard to distinguish between expressing an opinion and the facts. It tests
the limits of the First Amendment rights to free speech and the press. Libel is a common issue
since social media gives the public a platform to distribute written or published statements.
The laws against defamation differ throughout states. As a result, defamation laws vary
widely from one state to the next and are interpreted differently by judges.

ELEMENTS OF DEFAMATION
To prove prima facie defamation a plaintiff has to show these four things to prove he is liable
for defamation 1) a false statement 2)publication or communication to a third person 3)fault
amounting to at least negligence and lastly 4)damages
1. The first must be untrue. This could be expressed verbally or in writing. The claimant must
prove the following aspects of defamation in the Indian context or other means of
communication like movies, waxworks, pictures, music, or drawings.
2. Which Causes or is Likely to Cause Serious Hurt: The statement must be such that it either
seriously damages the claimant's good name or reputation or threatens to seriously harm a
business organization's finances.
3. Published to a Third Party: Someone has to be informed of the slanderous remarks.
4. Without Justification, Privilege, or Other Defense: The assertion must not be supported by
any privilege, justification, or other defense.

4|Page
To prove prima facie defamation a plantiff has to show these four things to prove he is lable
for defamation 1) a false statement 2)publication or communication to a third person 3)fault
amounting to at least negligence and lastly 4)damages
It's worth noting that the specific definition and elements of defamation can vary based on the
legal jurisdiction.

DEFENCES FOR DEFAMATION AND ITS DAMAGES?

Defamation defences might differ according on the jurisdiction, however some typical ones
are as follows:
1. Truth – The most basic defence against defamation is demonstrating the veracity of the
alleged remark. In most cases, a statement that is factually true cannot be deemed defamatory.
Nonetheless, it is frequently the defendant's responsibility to provide evidence that the
assertion is true.
2. Privilege: A speaker may make a statement that is shielded from legal repercussions for
defamation, even if it is untrue. This is known as legal privilege. There are two typical kinds
of privilege:
Absolute Privilege: Generally speaking, this refers to remarks made in specific legal or
legislative circumstances, like court cases or remarks made by legislators during meetings.
Qualified Privilege: This privilege might be applicable in circumstances where sharing the
information is necessary for a justifiable purpose, like in a job reference.
3. Opinion: Generally speaking, speech that expresses opinions as opposed to factual claims
is protected expression. On the other hand, a false remark presented as a statement of fact
might not qualify as an opinion and might not be protected.
4. Public Figure Defense: In defamation lawsuits, public figures—such as politicians or
celebrities—typically bear a heavier burden of evidence. In order to prevail in a defamation
lawsuit, a public person typically has to demonstrate that the statement was made with "actual
malice," which denotes that the speaker behaved with reckless disregard for the truth or
understood it to be untrue.
5. Consent: - If the statement's subject provided permission for it to be published or
circulated, such permission may be used as a defamation defence.
6. Limitation Period: There may be a time restriction on how soon after the alleged
defamatory statement is made in certain countries before a defamation case can be launched.
The statute of limitations may be invoked by the defendant as a defence if the plaintiff does
not file within this period.

DAMAGES
Defamation may affect people and businesses in profound and far-reaching ways. Defamation
damages may include the following:

5|Page
1. Reputation Damage: Defamation can cause injury to a person's or an organization's
reputation, which can result in a bad public image, a loss of credibility, and a lack of trust.
2. Emotional Distress: Those who are harmed by defamation or who work for the company
that is being slandered may experience stress, anxiety, depression, and other mental health
problems as a result of the defamation.
3. Financial Loss: Due to a decline in business, the loss of clients or customers, fewer
chances, or other concrete financial consequences, defamation can cause financial losses for
both persons and organisations.
4. Legal Expenses: If the plaintiff wins their case, they may be awarded damages in addition
to attorney fees and court costs. Defamation claims frequently result in these types of
charges.
5. Effect on Employment: Defamation may have an effect on an individual's capacity to
obtain and maintain employment, as well as their ability to grow in their career.
6. Company Connections: Defamation can harm business relationships, partnerships, and
collaborations, which can result in missed chances and lost revenue in the future.
7. Effect on Mental Health: Defamation can have a negative personal and professional impact
on people, including employees, by causing stress, anxiety, and other mental health problems.

To what extent are social media platforms held liable for

defamatory content published by their users?

Under certain legal restrictions, social media networks are generally shielded from liability
for defamatory content posted by their users. Intermediaries are granted a safe harbour under
Section 79 of the Material Technology Act, which states that they are not responsible for any
third-party data, links, or information hosted on their platform. But there are several
restrictions on this safe harbour protection.
Laws and rules pertaining to social media companies' liability for defamatory content may
differ throughout jurisdictions. For instance, Section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013 in the UK
allows website operators to avoid liability for defamatory User Generated Content, but only
in specific situations.
Furthermore, social media networks are shielded from liability in the US by Section 230 of
the Communications Decency Act for content uploaded by their users. This means that under
this legal clause, social media platforms are not liable for defamatory posts made by their
users.
It's crucial to remember that a number of circumstances, including the particular laws and
regulations in each country, as well as the platforms' adherence to these laws and their actions
regarding the content in question, might affect how liable social media platforms are for
defamatory content.

6|Page
What are the legal challenges in defining and proving defamation
in the context of social media platforms?
Because online communication is distinct from offline communication, defining and proving
defamation in the context of social media platforms poses a number of legal issues. These are
a few major obstacles:
1 Rapid and proliferation of content: Since social media makes material available to a
large audience, it might be difficult to monitor the propagation of libellous content on
different platforms.
2.Identifying the source: Because anonymous or pseudonymous accounts are possible, as
well as the simplicity with which fraudulent or bot-generated profiles can be created,
identifying the source of defamatory content on social media can be challenging.
3. Evidence Preservation: Because online evidence, such sites and postings on social media,
can be altered or removed, it can be difficult to keep important evidence for defamation
lawsuits.
4. Jurisdictional Issues: Because social media crosses national borders, it can be difficult to
determine whose laws if any apply in defamation lawsuits when content is accessed and
shared globally.
5. User Awareness and Responsibility: Users may unintentionally post or distribute
defamatory content, underscoring the need for increased knowledge of defamation laws and
obligations when doing so.
6. Intermediary Liability: It's still a complicated legal matter to define social media
companies' liability as middlemen for user-generated defamatory content, particularly in light
of US laws like Section 230.
7. Determining Injury: Given the volume and speed of online communication,
demonstrating the degree of harm brought about by defamatory speech on social media,
particularly its effect on reputation, can be difficult.
It might be necessary to combine technological, legal, and policy solutions to address these
issues, as well as international cooperation in situations where there are cross-border
ramifications. Mitigating these difficulties requires developing greater accountability among
online users and platforms and adapting current defamation laws to the digital context.

7|Page
What are the implications of anonymous posting and fake profiles on social
media platforms for defamation cases?
Defamation cases are significantly complicated by anonymous postings and false personas on
social media platforms for a number of reasons:
1. Identity and Accountability: Users operating under pseudonyms or anonymity have the
capacity to disseminate defamatory content without being recognised or held legally
accountable. Finding the true identities hidden behind false profiles is a difficult task that
often calls for cyber forensic experience.
2. Jurisdictional Issues: Defamation committed by anonymous users or false profiles abroad
gives rise to jurisdictional issues on an international level. Conflicts over jurisdiction might
occur and make it challenging to take legal action.
3. Gathering Evidence: It can be difficult to verify the veracity and source of slanderous
remarks made by phoney profiles or anonymous commenters. Evidence gathering is made
more difficult by their ability to remove or edit posts.
4. Impact on Reputation: Anonymous defamatory content, which may be disseminated via
phoney personas, can seriously damage reputation because it can be difficult to track down
the source of the charges and difficult to publicly answer them.
5. Platform Liability: The prevalence of phoney profiles and the ease with which anonymous
posting is permitted raise concerns regarding the responsibility and involvement of social
media platforms in handling these kinds of situations.
6. Enforcement of Judgements: If a defamer uses a false profile or stays anonymous, it may
be impossible for them to collect damages, even if they win a defamation lawsuit.
Generally, the intricacy and difficulties of defamation on social media platforms are increased
by anonymous posting and false personas. In order to handle such instances effectively, a
combination of legal, technical, and regulatory measures.

Methodology:
Research in social sciences is an ongoing process. Continuous upgradation and improvement
of available facts is an important task to undertake. Therefore it is necessary to use the correct
methods in conducting research. The proper modes of data collection and then analysis are
varied. Intersection of different methods leads to a proper conduction in research topic that
will help us to arrive at viable conclusions.

8|Page
The mode of research is secondary. It means I have gone through several articles and research
papers already available online to support my theories on caste based discrimination.
Secondary methods involves the use of reputed sites like academic journals, published
research papers, books authored by economic professors, social surveys etc. The data derived
form the available material was categorized to fit the selected research problems.
Comparative analysis was used to find similar patterns and identify similarities between
similar researchers publications.
Primary method of collection would not be possible due to limitation in time and non non-
availability of proper sample personnel to conduct surveys and or interviews.
CONCLUSION
In summary, social media's introduction has unquestionably changed how people connect,
communicate, and share information amongst themselves as well as between corporations
and institutions. While there are many benefits, such the ability to share knowledge globally,
create communities, and promote effectively, there are also special legal issues that have
arisen, especially when it comes to defamation.
In the world of social media, defamation, an already complicated legal matter, becomes much
more complicated. The swift spread of content, the difficulty in locating the original source of
defamatory remarks, the preservation of evidence, the complexity of jurisdiction, user
awareness and accountability, and the intermediary liability of social media platforms are the
main causes of the legal concerns. The dynamic character of digital communication and the
worldwide outreach of social media platforms provide further challenges to the enforcement
of conventional defamation legislation.
Defamation cases are further complicated by the ramifications of anonymous posting and
phoney personas on social media platforms. There are many obstacles in the way of anyone
considering legal action, including users' freedom to distribute defamatory content without
consequence, jurisdictional issues, the difficulty of obtaining proof, the damage to one's
reputation, and possible platform liability concerns.
A broad strategy including technological, legal, and policy solutions is needed to address
these issues. International collaboration is required to provide uniform legal frameworks and
manage cross-border implications. Defamation laws also need to be updated for the digital
age, and platforms and users alike need to be held accountable. Maintaining the ideals of free
speech while safeguarding people's reputations continues to be a major concern facing legal
systems around the world as they adapt to the needs of the digital age.
Legal systems, legislators, and technology stakeholders must work together to create
comprehensive solutions in order to address these issues and guarantee social media usage
that is both reasonable and responsible while protecting people and companies from the
potentially devastating effects of defamation. Every case has a major impact on how the law
is shaped in this dynamic and ever-evolving sector as the legal landscape continues to change.

9|Page
REFERENCES
1. https://kjk.com/2021/06/08/fighting-defamation-how-law-firms-identify-anonymous-
internet-
users/#:~:text=Identifying%20an%20anonymous%20attacker%20forces,more%20con
tent%20in%20the%20future.
2. Kah Leng, T. (2015). Internet defamation and the online intermediary. Computer Law &
Security Review, 31(1), 68-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.11.009
3. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation
4. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/personal-injury/elements-defamation/

10 | P a g e