Wow, what a chapter!
The reading made me think more about PR theory/practice in that the legal environment is so harsh and complex. Just when I understood one area of law, for example defamation, I would read on to find another area which could protect someone from liability of defamation.
My overall understanding of defamation after reading this chapter was it "aims to protect a person's reputation" (Johnston & Zawawi, 2004:79). I completely agree with this point of view. I would not want a third person reading/seeing a publication of me in compromising or untrue circumstances.
However, I would argue that we as a society have the right to be made aware of some reputations. Maybe I could open a discussion about this scenario, which has been caused some media stir over the years: Would you want information published in your local newspaper/on your local TV station about a criminal who is released from jail and who will be residing in your area? Do you think it's right the community should not know about their reputation? I am not saying I agree/disagree, because everyone is entitled to a second chance, I was just using that as an example and would be interested in your opinion.
Another interesting point made in the reading was "in deciding whether a publication is defamatory, the publisher's intention is irrelevant" (Johnston & Zawawi, 2004:79). In my own opinion, given my knowledge of law is minimal, I do think this is a little unfair. For this reason I felt a little sorry for Slater and Gordon solicitors being fined for their promotional material which was found to defame two prominent surgeons (Johnston & Zawawi). The publisher's in this instance had digitally changed images to prevent the identities of the surgeons being known, therefore indicating their intention was not to defame, however Slater and Gordon still lost the defamation case.
I think the key points to remember from this week's reading is the legal environment is a very complex area. It demonstrates why PR Practitioners should familiarise themselves with certain aspects of media law before undertaking any kind of PR campaign.
This week I commented on http://www.cmns1290lauriealexander.blogspot.com
References
Johnston, J. & Zawawi, C. (2006) Public Relations Theory and Practice, Allen&Unwin, Sydney.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Kell this chapter really reminded me why I didn't end up persuing a career in legal!! It's complex and difficult to get your head around because it often appears contradictory. Halfway through this chapter, I started wondering if I should be doing a double degree in law as well as PR, so as not to entange myself in lawsuits through my career!
I find defamation really interesting, because what does a person have if not their reputation?? Have you ever met someone for the first time but had heard of them from someone else? How much of your first impression of that person was based on what you had originally heard?
Your scenario I found interesting. From a personal point of view it would depend on what type of crime that person had committed. Having two small children, I would certainly want to know if a convicted paedophile was to be released into my immediate community - not because I necessarily think that that person will reoffend, but because I would like to be wary for the sake of my childrens' safety. I would not consider this knowledge defamatory, however. Personally I would be willing to give that person the benefit of the doubt, but perhaps others would not be so kind. I understand that convicted criminals often have a difficult time reestablishing themselves in the community but given a chance the knowledge of their presence in the community shouldn't work against them.
I agree with PR practitioners familiarising themselves with legalities. If we don't, we could very well end up in hot water, however innocent the mistake may be.
Post a Comment