Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk

Back to thread
Original poster

Removal of threads considered to be 'potentially libellous' ie somebody has complained

9 replies

dikkertjedap · 13/02/2013 10:25

To think that threads are being removed because they are 'potentially' libellous (thinking about the Safecobs thread) is very sad as it makes it very difficult for people to find proper information on the internet.

On Mumsnet you can say all kind of things about certain NHS hospitals, but if you say something about this unscrupulous horse trader the threads are being removed and more people may become a victim.

AIBU to think that before removing such a thread Mumsnet HQ should seek a legal opinion rather than what could be seen as pandering to the threats of unscrupulous individuals?

Go to post
MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/02/2013 15:33

@janey68

Most of us cottoned on months ago that theres no rhyme or reason to posts and threads which are Deleted. I expect it depends if someone at MNHQ is mummy mates with someone working for a particular company Smile

Gosh. That's a bit of an assumption, janey68.

Actually, there is quite a lot of rhyme and reason to why certain threads/posts are deleted for legal reasons.

The libel law in this country is quite, erm, unique. But we do think it's a good idea to abide by it.

Mumsnet is a post-moderated site. This means we don't read and pre-moderate postings on our site. However, we will, of course, remove postings that contain potentially defamatory comments, once they are brought to our attention.

This is because we, as the publishers of the comment and the poster, as its author, would be jointly liable, should we refuse to take the posting/thread down, once we'd been given notice of it.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/02/2013 17:12

@amillionyears

Is that why you keep asking for posts to be reported?

Because else you could be jointly liable for defamation with the poster, but not actually realise there was a problem until it was reported to you?
If that makes sense

No, it doesn't quite make sense, amillion. Sorry if we're not being clear.

We are not liable for tiddlysquat - until we are given notice (via a report or a mail to us) that a post or thread is potentially defamatory.

Our request for posts to be reported has more to do with fair and equal application of our Talk Guideliens, than with our eagerness to hear about potentially libellous threads.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/02/2013 17:22

@BigAudioDynamite

So, if we all stopped reporting posts...you wouldn't be liable for anything. Then we could talk about what ever we liked, all the time?! Smile

No. Because, to be honest, Mr Big Shot Sue Your Arse Off Solicitor doesn't muck around with joining Mumsnet, so he can report stuff. He sends in a big fat mail to us instead.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/02/2013 17:48

@amillionyears

Sorry, I am more confused than before.[probably me being a bit thick].

If no one reports, than you are not liable.
That is, not us reporting or not a solicitor reporting.

But, if someone reports something, either a poster or a solicitor, or presumably anyone on the planet, once your attention has been drawn to it, then you are potentially liable?

So really, you dont want reports from anyone of anything possibly defamatory, because then you may have to do something.

Is that right?

No quite, amillionyears. What we're saying is, if doesn't matter if no one on the boards reports something potentially libellous. It may still be deleted by us, because we may be notified of the potential libel by email instead.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/02/2013 17:50

If it's ok with everyone, I'm going to move this thread to Site Stuff. It's kinda where it belongs.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 15/02/2013 09:27

@amillionyears

I thought the school one was bread, so ignored it for about 3 months!
Grin
MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 15/02/2013 09:33

@Maryz

Gosh, no, I don't at all think it's had it's day - I think that as there are more and more members they will be watching us even more closely.

But I think the necessity to actually come on a thread as TescoMary [arf] and say "we have seen this and it is certainly not how we would like to react, so please op contact this email tomorrow and I will deal with you personally" as used to happen isn't so important.

Simply because everything nowadays is even more instant than mumsnet.

You can get an immediate response from Tesco Facebook or Twitter (apparently, I have no idea how either work, because I am an old gimmer).

Though I suppose in a way more members also means slight dilution of issues, possibly. In the old days of only a few hundred active members meant that if I (as a known poster) said I had a shit experience with a company, every single person on the site would see it. Now will hundreds of thousands of members, and some arriving only to spam or troll, a similar post might get missed.

If that makes sense at all.

I didn't see the Safecobs threads - for quite a while I thought we were talking about sweetcorn, not horses Grin.

Morning. Just a couple of points that might help.

We actively discourage organisations from posting on MN, as we've found in the past that they tend to do it to promote themselves more than anything else.

For example, we had a poster called BigSupermarketAngie (not her real name), who, under the guise of helping out posters with their queries about said big supermarket was very forthcoming about her supermarket's current special offers...

However, if someone is mouthing off complaining about their terrible experience as a customer of Random Example Corporation and Random Example Corporation mail us and want to help sort out stuff for the person complaining, we offer to post up a statement on their behalf.

Also, if an organisation not thinking of anything even remotely connected with bread is repeatedly mailing us to allege posters are posting libellous messages, we do also suggest a statement from them might help clear the air and stem any suspicion that they might be trying to close any discussion of their organisation down.

Often, the organisation agrees to this, seeing the sense in engaging with MNers, rather than pressing for deletion. Sometimes, they don't...

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 15/02/2013 09:37

@Maryz

x-posted there Helen. Clear as mud, that.

In other words, if a big company is being precious and are afraid of mumsnetters they have a right to reply Grin.

No, everyone has the right to reply, big or small.

But they don't have the right to promote themselves all over the shop. We have ads for that...

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 15/02/2013 09:58

@BeerTricksPotter

The same school, amillion? Hmm, it's possible, yes. I don't want to dredge it all up for this thread though, so I'll just leave it at that, I think.

Please don't!

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread

Back to thread