posted by Doyle
Twitter must be official now — the lawyers have gotten involved.
While this may not be the first lawsuit over a tweet, it’s the first one I’ve seen (thanks to Liz Strauss for the tweet on this topic today). The suit, which is asking for $50,000 in damages, alleges a Twitter user “maliciously and wrongfully published the false and defamatory Tweet on Twitter, thereby allowing the Tweet to be distributed throughout the world.”
The tweet in question? “You should just come anyway. Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it’s OK.”
Horizon Realty Group was not amused and filed the complaint (link to a copy above) and is asking for $50,000.
I guess I should be hearing from United Airlines soon! (Sorry, United gets no link. I’m still mad at them.)
Kidding aside, this brings up some important points for discussion:
- Tweets, Facebook posts, etc., are typically public. You’re not sending a private email to a friend. Even though this tweet was an @reply, the conversation was public. As users, we need to understand that.
- I’ve been called the King of Snark on Twitter, but I also know that I’m responsible for what I say — and every user should hold themselves to that standard. If you make a statement, you should believe it, even if it’s a smart remark, like this clearly was. If this person can document a mold problem and that the proper channels have been informed with no acceptable results, this comment can certainly be justified and probably even defended. If not, perhaps the remark was premature and perhaps out of line.
- For Horizon, if this person has been provided with the service they believe to be appropriate based on the situation and continues to complain — now publicly — and they truly believe it is unjustified and malicious, perhaps a lawsuit is the only answer. I do hope it was considered as a last resort and not a first shot across the bow. My recommendation would have been some conversation on Twitter first — perhaps, “We were at your apartment yesterday at your request and found no evidence of mold. May we take this offline?” While the lawyers might not agree with that tactic, the online conversation is forcing us to “think different,” as Apple used to say (see my post on a similar point here).
In the end, it’s hard for any of us to say who’s right or who’s wrong here, but I think the conversation is important. Be responsible for your words, and companies need to understand there is a very public channel for comment emerging. The complaint rightly notes that the tweet could be “distributed throughout the world.”
Easy prediction: this won’t be the last lawsuit we see based on comments made on Twitter or Facebook or Yelp or other social networks, but I also think the knee-jerk “file a suit” reaction will need to be re-thought, as will the flippancy of comments and complaints made in these very public forums.
Your thoughts?
5 responses so far ↓
1 Simon Kuo // Jul 28, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Nice thoughtful perspective Doyle. I think there is a natural tendency to think the one party or the other is "at fault" without understanding more about the complaint and the history behind it. However it is unfortunate that in this case a lawsuit was considered the best option to settle this issue.
2 Doyle Albee // Jul 28, 2009 at 7:16 pm
I agree. I'd like to think there was conversation before the suit, but we don't know. From a social media perspective, my recommendation continues to be to converse via Twitter in a positive way first. Organizations must remember there's winning in court, and winning in the court of public opinion. Both are important, and it's easy to win the battle but lose the war, especially online.
3 Erika Napoletano // Jul 29, 2009 at 7:01 pm
As someone who can be perceived as an "incendiary blogger" and Twitter user, there's no doubt in my mind that I'm responsible for what comes out of my keyboard. I even blogged about the topic on my blog (entitled "The Importance of Blogging Earnest").
I do, however, think it's a case of cutting off the nose to spite one's face, as the realty company in question how has the whole world wondering if their properties have a mold problem. As you said, service is key – if you don't address it, your dissatisfied customers certainly will.
4 Kim // Aug 15, 2009 at 5:23 pm
I have very serious questions about the CONSTITUTIONALITY of this kind of suit. If there indeed is a mold problem in this persons apartment, they have the right to express their feelings about the problem in my opinion.
This is an extreme chilling effect on freedom of speech. To my knowledge, twitter is social and is protected by the Constitition and the right to freely associate as well as free speech and free expression. If an issue is true, whether or not the company is doing anything about it, I understand that speaking the truth about the existence of the mold is fine. The company doing something to clean up the mold would not even hinder your right to mention the mold as existing.
Opinions are also protected. This is part of free speech. I have the right to say I despise Jane Doe. That is my opinion in the same way I may say that I believe the government of a certain country holding elections is being unfair to voters…
I'm surprised at the lack of knowledge on this issue and of observations that this suit has very serious issues where civil rights and expression are concerned.
5 Doyle Albee // Aug 19, 2009 at 4:30 am
Kim: Thanks for weighing in. While I tend to agree with you that a lawsuit is the wrong answer in general, as I've stated here, none of us know all the facts of the case. And while the expression of opinions in most cases is protected (there are, I believe, some exceptions), in this case an accusation was made (that Horizon thinks it's OK to sleep in a moldy apartment). That's different than saying "there's mold in my apartment" or "I think Horizon is doing a bad job with this situation" etc. To extend your example, while it may well be OK to say "I despise Jane Doe," that protection doesn't necessarily extend to "Jane Doe thinks it's OK to do a lousy job at work."
As I said, I believe this is a very important conversation. While I personally believe Horizon's reaction was heavy-handed and, depending on the decision, could very well have a chilling outcome, I think it's also important for people to take responsibility for their online comments. Too many comment threads devolve into speech that may not be illegal, but it is often low-minded, insulting and often offensive. From there, it's easy to cross the line into libel.
To me, the most chilling thing would be for social media outlets to limit comments just to avoid lawsuits. To avoid that, both those who wish to sue and those who wish to comment need to exercise some common sense.
Again, Kim, thanks for the comment. Hope to see you here again!
You must log in to post a comment.