Social Media

1uesday !
une 23 2009uefamaLlon and Soclal Medla

Pello!

uefamaLlon ls becomlng a huge lssue on soclal medla slLes such as 8logs 1wlLLer and lacebook 8ecenLly
Lhere have been some noLable cases lnvolvlng defamaLlon llLlgaLlon Speclflcally CourLney Love ls belng sued
for maklng an alleged defamaLory LweeL abouL a famous deslgner

WhaL ls a defamaLory sLaLemenL? 1he law deflnes defamaLlon as spoken or wrlLLen words LhaL are false and or
mlsleadlng LhaL glves Lhe defamed a negaLlve lmage and or hurLs Lhelr repuLaLlon 1he defamaLory sLaLemenL
musL be made Lo someone oLher Lhan Lhe person sub[ecL Lo Lhe defamaLlon 1he law also dlfferenLlaLes
beLween wrlLLen and oral defamaLory sLaLemenLs WrlLLen sLaLemenLs are called llbel and oral sLaLemenLs are
slander

Who ls llable for llbel sLaLemenLs made on blogs or soclal neLworks? Are owners of Lhese slLes llable for
defamaLory sLaLemenLs made by users of Lhelr slLes? Cr ls Lhe person who made Lhe defamlng sLaLemenL
solely llable?

under Lhe CommunlcaLlons uecency AcL an owner of a soclal neLworklng slLe ls noL llable for Lhe defamaLory
sLaLemenLs made abouL anoLher on Lhelr slLe unless Lhe slLe owner acLlvely engages ln Lhe gaLherlng of
lnformaLlon from Lhe user LhaL leads Lo Lhe defamaLory sLaLemenL An example of Lhls Lype of behavlor ls a
blog owner sollclLlng commenLs from users on wheLher Lhey dlsllke CelebrlLy x and why? 1he commenLs leads
Lo defamaLory sLaLemenLs abouL Lhe celebrlLy and Lhe blog owner supporLs encourages and endorses Lhe
llbel sLaLemenLs

Cf course anyone who makes a defamaLory sLaLemenL abouL anoLher on any soclal neLwork ls personally
llable for hls or her sLaLemenLs

Pow can owners of soclal neLworklng slLes and users of Lhese slLes proLecL Lhemselves from defamaLlon
llablllLy?

Cwners should dlscourage and lmmedlaLely remove poLenLlally defamaLory or llbel sLaLemenLs from Lhelr
slLes Cwners should never enLer lnLo any dlalogue wlLh a user concernlng a persons repuLaLlon ln addlLlon
lncludlng a dlsclalmer or sLaLemenL regardlng your removal of any defamaLory sLaLemenLs on your slLe may
poLenLlally dlscourage users from engaglng ln such behavlor lus lL puLs Lhe publlc on noLlce LhaL you do noL
endorse defamaLory conducL

users of soclal neLworklng slLes should avold personal oplnlons or negaLlve commenLs LhaL are noL 100
facLual and or sLaLemenLs LhaL may harm a persons lmage or repuLaLlon 1he besL advlce l have ever recelved
ls lf you donL have anyLhlng poslLlve Lo say Lhen donL say noLhlng aL all Cne negaLlve commenL could cosL
you Lons of money and hearLache

Cnllne rlvacy v uefamaLlon Law
Aug 28Lh 2009 | 8y Madelelne llannagan | CaLegory 8logglng leaLured Lead ArLlcle Soclal Medla Soclal neLworklng
1haL Lhe rlghL Lo prlvacy exLends Lo Lhe lnLerneL ls noL someLhlng many would dlspuLe Whlle ldeally Lhe
prlnclple LhaL lf you cannoL say someLhlng Lo someone's face you should noL say lL aL all ls a prlnclple we value
ln socleLy Lhe rlghL Lo face one's accusers belng a promlnenL maxlm exempllfylng Lhls we all accepL LhaL
Lhere may be Llmes when lf one wlshes Lo speak anonymously Lhere ls noLhlng lmmoral abouL dolng so
AnonymlLy on Lhe lnLerneL ls so commonplace LhaL many lnLerneL companles have sLrlcL prlvacy pollcles and
many counLrles have laws whlch exLend Lhe rlghL Lo prlvacy Lo cover anonymous onllne speech

8uL how far does Lhls cyberrlghL Lo prlvacy exLend? uoes lL sLand when people use lL as a shleld Lo harm
oLhers Lo damage Lhelr repuLaLlons?

uefamaLlon law geLs a loL of flack for lLs chllllng effecL on freedom of speech and lLs poLenLlal for bankrupLlng
[udgmenLs so some see Lhe growLh of prlvacy laws and pollcles of Lhls naLure Lo be a good Lhlng buL
defamaLlon laws exlsL for a reason lL ls noL unreasonable Lo assume LhaL sLaLemenLs perLalnlng Lo oLhers are
Lrue falrly and accuraLely made because repuLaLlon maLLers lLs un[usL loss can cause conslderable harm As
SLephen lranks wrlLes Clvlllsed [urlsdlcLlons depend on people belng concerned abouL Lhelr repuLaLlons on
Lhere belng deLerrenL consequences Lo a bad repuLaLlon and lncenLlve consequences Lo a good repuLaLlon"

ALLempLs Lo use prlvacy law Lo abollsh repuLaLlon musL be balanced agalnsL defamaLlon's chllllng effecL on
freedom of speech lranks agrees ubllc commenL has been unleashed by Lhe lnLerneL Lo prlck pomposlLy
and Lo undermlne Lhose who would keep Lhe LruLh Lo anolnLed lnslders lL should noL be warped by
defamaLlon law"

Pow Lhen should we vlew lasL week's ln a landmark case? !usLlce Madden forced Coogle Lo provlde Lhe courL
wlLh an anonymous blogger's real name so LhaL Llskula Cohen could sue Lhe person who had falsely vlllfled her
as a skank" hag" and psychoLlc lylng whore" Coogle had refused Cohen's requesL Lo reveal Lhe ldenLlLy of
Lhe alleged defamer 8osemary orL clLlng lLs prlvacy pollcy Cohen (apparenLly as unquallfled Lo apply for Lhe
ClA's hacklng Leam as Lhe resL of us) found herself wlLh no cholce buL Lo puL Lhe law Lo Lhe LesL lf she was Lo
geL any furLher ln Lhe exerclse Lo proLecL her repuLaLlon

ln her [udgmenL !usLlce Madden re[ecLed Lhe defense's clalm LhaL blogs serve as a modernday forum for
conveylng personal oplnlons lncludlng lnvecLlve and ranLlng" and LhaL only facLual asserLlons should be
consldered llbelous ln re[ecLlng Lhe prlvacy and free speech argumenLs Per Ponor wroLe of orL's blog 1he
LhrusL of Lhe blog ls LhaL Lhe peLlLloner ls a sexually promlscuous woman" a concluslon she reached
conslderlng boLh Lhe words and Lhe conLexL of Lhelr placemenL alongslde plcLures of Cohen ln provocaLlve
poses

lL seems LhaL Lhe Lenslon ls welghLed ln repuLaLlon's favour prlvacy law wlll only shleld onllne speech and
proLecL prlvacy provlded one ls speaklng wlLhln Lhe conflnes of defamaLlon law uoes Lhls mean you can never
be crlLlcal of oLhers when wrlLlng onllne? no buL you should probably Lry Lo keep your words Lrue falr and
accuraLely sLaLed

S orL ls now saylng she wlll sue Coogle for $16 mllllon for breachlng lLs flduclary duLy Lo proLecL her
expecLaLlon of anonymlLy" lrankly l don'L llke her chances Coogle hardly gave up her emall address
volunLarlly
Soclal medla defamaLlon rules eople have Lo be careful abouL whaL Lhey posL on soclal medla webslLes
WrlLankar Mukher[ee L1 8ureau nov 11 2011 0700am lS1
1he power Lo publlsh whlch was once Lhe preserve of a few ls now commonplace Lhe prlvllege ls accesslble
Lo anyone wlLh an lnLerneL connecLlon who has anyLhlng Lo say Whlle Lhe powers of publlshlng may have
been well dlspersed lL ls noL so well undersLood LhaL everyone ls bound by Lhe same rules and resLralns LhaL
apply Lo LradlLlonal publlshers and medla professlonals
Soclal medla slLes whlch have played an lmporLanL parL ln empowerlng Lhe ordlnary clLlzen Lo publlsh are no
dlfferenL from newspapers magazlnes or books when lL comes Lo Lhe dangers of defamaLlon

1hls was exempllfled a few days ago when Suhel SeLh a markeLlng professlonal and medla personallLy was
sued by l1C for commenLs he made on Lhe mlcroblogglng slLe 1wlLLer 1he conglomeraLe has accused hlm of
defamaLlon and asked a 8angalore courL Lo make hlm pay 8s 200 crore ln damages SeLh has denled dolng any
wrong

Soclal medla ls unfoldlng a paradlgm shlfL slnce everybody ls now a broadcasLer 1hls lncreases Lhe rlsk of
defamaLlon for users wlLhouL Lhem even belng aware of lL says awan uuggal who pracLlses ln Lhe Supreme
CourL and speclallses ln cyber law

ln facL Lhe damage from soclal medla defamaLlon can be hlgher slnce Lhe medlum ls lnsLanLaneous vlral and
more poLenL Lhan LradlLlonal medla

ln !une a moblle phone user who was vodafones cusLomer venLed hls feellngs abouL poor servlce on
lacebook and was sued by Lhe Lelecom provlder lL backed off when Lhe medla was aLLracLed Lo Lhe sLory buL
Lhe lncldenL proved LhaL companles are waLchlng whaL ls sald abouL Lhem on soclal medla slLes lf amaLeur
publlshers are noL on flrm ground Lhey could be ln Lrouble

eople have Lo be more careful abouL whaL Lhey posL on such slLes as Lhese are also sub[ecL Lo Lhe same laws
of defamaLlon and characLer assasslnaLlon says Adl Codre[ chalrman of Lhe Codre[ group

1he baslc rules of publlshlng are very slmple buL lL Lakes dlsclpllne Lo follow Lhem every Llme verlfy facLs
donL be offenslve Lo anybody ln parLlcular donL dlsLorL

uerek C8rlen a qulzmasLer and a frequenL user of 1wlLLer feels self conLrol ls exLremely lmporLanL and so
also ls a code of conducL

As much as l am an advocaLe and user of soclal neLworklng slLes llke 1wlLLer lnsLances of LwlL and run sully
Lhe medlum 1hls ls noL accepLable he says lndla has abouL 120 mllllon lnLerneL users and lacebook says
abouL a flfLh of Lhls number are acLlve users 1wlLLer clalms LhaL abouL 4 mllllon people use lLs servlce aL leasL
once a monLh

1wlLLer dld noL reply Lo emalls for Lhls sLory buL lacebooks uebble lrosL sald Lhe soclal neLworklng slLe wanLs
Lo be a place where people can openly dlscuss lssues and express vlews whlle respecLlng Lhe rlghLs and feellngs
of oLhers 1he goal of lacebooks pollcles she sald ls Lo sLrlke a very dellcaLe balance beLween glvlng people
Lhe freedom Lo express Lhelr oplnlons and vlewpolnLseven Lhose LhaL may be conLroverslal Lo someand
malnLalnlng a safe and LrusLed envlronmenL
1he consequences of defamaLlon damage for users of soclal medla could be much more Lhan ln LradlLlonal
medla says Sa[an oovayya managlng parLner aL 8angalorebased legal flrm oovayya Co who speclallses ln
lnLerneL llLlgaLlon and has cllenLs such as Coogle and Lhe Wlklmedla loundaLlon uefamaLlon ln LradlLlonal
medla would make Lhe auLhor edlLor and publlsher equally responslble whereas ln soclal medla Lhe enLlre
burden ls on Lhe auLhor he says

under Lhe lndlan enal Code and Lhe law governlng lnformaLlon Lechnology Lhose found gullLy of defamaLlon
can be asked Lo pay a flne a serve up Lo Lhree years ln [all lndlan law however does noL have speclflc
provlslons relaLlng Lo soclal medla

WlLh soclal medla users growlng ln number companles are seLLlng up dedlcaLed Leams Lo Lrack commenLs on
slLes such as lacebook and 1wlLLer Such Leams also respond Lo negaLlve cusLomer complalnLs lf Lhe negaLlve
commenLs are exLreme companles ofLen Lhem Lo Lhelr legal Leams

AdverLlslng professlonal lyush andey says soclal medla parLlclpanLs need Lo become more aware of Lhe
plLfalls of publlshlng on soclal medla slLes 1he aLLlLude of LweeLlng before Lhlnklng ls whaL geLs one lnLo
Lrouble lL allows people Lo be lmpeLuous whlch creaLes Lhe problem 1he lnsLanL naLure of Lhe medlum ls
such LhaL Lhere need Lo be some guldellnes says andey Lhe execuLlve chalrman of Cgllvy MaLher lndla

Some corporaLes have sLarLed drawlng up soclal medla guldellnes for Lhelr employees among Lhem lnLel
MlcrosofL 1CS ur 8eddys Lab and l8M lnLels guldellnes say LhaL employees musL posL meanlngful and
respecLful commenLs ln oLher words no spam and no remarks LhaL are offLoplc or offenslve l8M asks lLs
employees Lo 8especL your audlence uonL use eLhnlc slurs personal lnsulLs obscenlLy or engage ln any
conducL LhaL would noL be accepLable ln l8Ms workplace

1he cyber law experL uugall ls of Lhe vlew LhaL wh lle codes of conducL by companles and soclal medla
plaLforms can help lL ls users who musL show responslblllLy A rule can acL as a deLerrenL buL ulLlmaLely lL
cannoL prevenL

WA1CP Cu1

Lack of awareness of defamaLlon laws ls no excuse for soclal medla users 8ules of Lhe game verlfy facLs uonL
dlsLorL uonL be offenslve Soclal medla users wlll be held Lo accounL noL plaLforms such as lacebook or 1wlLer
Companles are scannlng soclal medla slLes so any sllpup could land users ln legal Lrouble Cffenders can be
flned and senL Lo [all for up Lo Lhree years

lrlday !uly 9 2010

Soclal Medla uefamaLlon

Accordlng Lo Lawcoms onllne legal dlcLlonary Lhe deflnlLlon of defamaLlon ls Lhe acL of maklng unLrue
sLaLemenLs abouL anoLher whlch damages hls/her repuLaLlon lf Lhe defamaLory sLaLemenL ls prlnLed or
broadcasL over Lhe medla lL ls llbel and lf only oral lL ls slander ubllc flgures lncludlng offlceholders and
candldaLes have Lo show LhaL Lhe defamaLlon was made wlLh mallclous lnLenL and was noL [usL falr commenL
uamages for slander may be llmlLed Lo acLual (speclal) damages unless Lhere ls mallce Some sLaLemenLs such
as an accusaLlon of havlng commlLLed a crlme havlng a feared dlsease or belng unable Lo perform ones
occupaLlon are called llbel per se or slander per se and can more easlly lead Lo large money awards ln courL
and even punlLlve damage recovery by Lhe person harmed MosL sLaLes provlde for a demand for a prlnLed
reLracLlon of defamaLlon and only allow a lawsulL lf Lhere ls no such admlsslon of error

ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age llbel and slander can be devasLaLlng Lo a person or Lhe repuLaLlon of a buslness 1here
are numerous web slLes LhaL allow consumers and oLher Lhlrd parLles Lo posL commenLs abouL a buslness or a
person under SecLlon 230 of Lhe CommunclaLlons uecency AcL lSs generally have lmmunlLy from all
lnformaLlon posLed on Lhelr webslLes by Lhlrd parLy users lf Lhey meeL a Lhree pronged legal LesL

Cn !uly 8 2010 Lhe Lebron !ames sweepsLakes ended when !ames declded Lo slgn a new conLracL wlLh Lhe
Mlaml PeaL Pls old employer Lhe Cleveland Cavallers was devasLaLed uan CllberL Lhe Cavallers owner
posLed an open leLLer Lo Clevelands fans LhaL bashed !ames 1he leLLer conLalns CllberLs oplnlon and does noL
appear Lo llbel !ames Powever ln an lnLervlew wlLh Lhe AssoclaLed ress lL appears LhaL CllberL may have
slandered !ames by sLaLlng Pe !ames qulL noL [usL ln Came 3 ln Lhe 2010 playoffs buL ln Cames 2 4 and
6 WaLch Lhe Lape 1he 8osLon serles was unllke anyLhlng ln Lhe hlsLory of sporLs for a supersLar ln general
llbel and slander lawsulLs are more dlfflculL for celebrlLles Lo wln Lhan for Lhose who are noL ln Lhe publlc eye

!ames had fulfllled hls conLracL and had no legal obllgaLlon Lo conLlnue Lo work for Lhe Cleveland Cavallers
1haL belng sald boLh !ames and CllberL could have handled Lhe slLuaLlon ln a more professlonal manner
!ames should noL have requesLed Lhe one hour LSn speclal Lo announce LhaL he was leavlng Cleveland and
slgnlng wlLh Mlaml Powever CllberLs reacLlon Lo !ames declslon does noL make hlm a sympaLheLlc flgure
and lL may have caused hlm some legal llablllLy 1he boLLom llne ls LhaL ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age every wrlLen or
spoken word can be easlly dlssemlnaLed around Lhe world ln seconds 1herefore every Llme a company
communlcaLes wlLh Lhe medla lL needs Lo undersLand boLh Lhe publlc relaLlons and legal ramlflcaLlons of lLs
message

1o learn how Lo avold soclal medla defamaLlon you may conLacL me aL hLLp//wwwshearlawcom/

CopyrlghL 2010 by Lhe Law Cfflce of 8radley S Shear LLC All rlghLs reserved
PlghllghLs lrom Shear on Soclal Medla Law

Shear on Soclal Medla Law lnforms lLs readers abouL Lhe legal lssues LhaL confronL Lhose who uLlllze soclal
medla

uoes Lhe nCAA undersLand Lhe Legal lmpllcaLlons of Soclal Medla MonlLorlng?
l have grave concerns abouL Lhe nCAAs undersLandlng of Lhe legal lmpllcaLlons of soclal medla monlLorlng
1he AssoclaLed ress reporLed LhaL Lhe unlverslLy of norLh Carollna (unC) has been accused of uneLhlcal
conducL and fallure Lo monlLor lLs players ln parLlcular Lhe nCAA ls accuslng unC wlLh fallure Lo monlLor lLs
sLudenLaLhleLes soclal medla acLlvlLy

Cn page 21 of Lhe noLlce of AllegaLlons agalnsL unC (Case no M337 !une 21 2011) 9 b lL sLaLes ln
lebruary Lhrough !une 2010 Lhe lnsLlLuLlon unC dld noL adequaLely and conslsLenLly monlLor soclal
neLworklng acLlvlLy LhaL vlslbly lllusLraLed poLenLlal amaLeurlsm vlolaLlons wlLhln Lhe fooLball program whlch
delayed Lhe lnsLlLuLlons dlscovery and compounded Lhe provlslon of lmpermlsslble beneflLs ln AllegaLlon nos
4a 4c 4d and 4e ln 9 g Lhe nCAA ls requesLlng coples of maLerlals posLed on 1wlLLer by fooLball
sLudenLaLhleLes lurLhermore ln 9 h Lhe nCAA ls requesLlng a sLaLemenL summarlzlng lnformaLlon
reporLed by ______(lefL blank) regardlng Lhe lnsLlLuLlons efforLs Lo monlLor Lhe soclal neLworklng acLlvlLy of
fooLball sLudenLaLhleLes

As l prevlously sLaLed on !une 9 2011 soclal medla monlLorlng ls a fuLlle efforL LhaL only wasLes resources lf
Lhe nCAA ls now golng Lo requlre lLs members Lo acLlvely monlLor lLs sLudenLaLhleLes soclal medla accounLs
Lhls wlll open up a andoras box

Wlll Lhe nCAA soon requlre each of lLs member schools Lo have a mlnder follow Lhelr sLudenLaLhleLes Lo
llsLen ln on every conversaLlon phone call and revlew every emall LexL message elecLronlc communlcaLlon
eLc of Lhelr sLudenLaLhleLes? Wlll Lhe nCAA soon requlre every sLudenLaLhleLe llsL all of Lhelr soclal medla
accounLs Lo malnLaln ellglblllLy? WhaL lf a sLudenLaLhleLe changes hls screen name or deleLes a soclal medla
accounL and opens a new one? Wlll Lhe sLudenLaLhleLe be forced Lo noLlfy Lhelr schools compllance offlce
wlLhln 24 hours of Lhe change? lf a sLudenLaLhleLe forgeLs Lo reporL a soclal medla accounL change Lo Lhe
compllance offlce wlll Lhe sLudenLaLhleLe auLomaLlcally become lnellglble and/or Lhe member school be found
ln vlolaLlon of nCAA rules? lf so whaL wlll be Lhe punlshmenL?

Wlll Lhere be sLrlcL llablllLy for fallure Lo reporL? WhaL lf a sLudenLaLhleLe forgeLs or refuses Lo llsL an accounL
due Lo prlvacy and/or pollLlcal speech lssues? Wlll a sLudenLaLhleLe lose hls scholarshlp due Lo a refusal Lo
Lurn over hls soclal medla accounL lnformaLlon? WhaL lf a sLudenLaLhleLes lacebook wall ls prlvaLe and/or hls
1weeLs proLecLed? WhaL lf someone hacks lnLo a sLudenL aLhleLes accounL and creaLes posLs LhaL may be rules
lnfracLlons? WhaL lf a sLudenLaLhleLe has a rogue accounL LhaL ls noL reporLed Lo lLs compllance offlce? Wlll
Lhe nCAA requlre lLs members Lo Lrack down every posslble unreporLed sLudenLaLhleLe soclal medla accounL
and/or posL?

Could a member school be sLrlpped of a naLlonal Champlonshlp for fallure Lo properly reporL all sLudenL
aLhleLe soclal medla accounLs and/or alleged rules lnfracLlons LhaL may be dlscussed on soclal medla? 1he
nCAA ls golng down a very sllppery slope LhaL has ma[or llrsL AmendmenL and prlvacy lmpllcaLlons l hlghly
advlse Lhe nCAA Lo lmmedlaLely reLhlnk lLs soclal medla compllance allegaLlons agalnsL unC before lL embrolls
Lhe nCAA ln llLlgaLlon LhaL lL wlll ulLlmaLely lose

Soclal medla usage by sLudenLaLhleLes cannoL be eradlcaLed As Lhe Congressman AnLhony Welner maLLer
clearly demonsLraLes soclal medla monlLorlng ls fuLlle and ls a reacLlve and noL a proacLlve approach 1he besL
way for nCAA member schools Lo address soclal medla usage by Lhelr sLudenLaLhleLes ls by provldlng Lhem
soclal medla llfe skllls

1o learn how your lnsLlLuLlon can avold Lhe compllance plLfalls LhaL are lnherenL wlLh soclal medla usage and
Lo learn how Lo provlde your sLudenLaLhleLes soclal medla llfe skllls you may conLacL me aL
wwwshearlawcom

osLed !une 22 2011


Pow Lo 8espond Lo CrlLlclsm ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age
roperly respondlng Lo Soclal Medla CrlLlclsm ls an lmporLanL sklll Lo learn ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age Lhose who
learn Lhls sklll wlll be successful 1hose who are unable Lo masLer Lhls ablllLy wlll suffer 1here are several
meLhods LhaL may be uLlllzed when deallng wlLh Soclal Medla CrlLlclsm Some of Lhe ways Lo deal wlLh Soclal
Medla CrlLlclsm lnclude

1) lgnorlng Lhe crlLlclsm and hope lL subsldes and ls soon forgoLLen
2) 8espondlng Lo Lhe crlLlclsm ln Lhe same medlum Lo demonsLraLe LhaL Lhe crlLlclsm ls unfounded
3) 1aklng legal acLlon agalnsL Lhose who have crlLlclzed you

lgnorlng Lhe crlLlclsm may work ln some lnsLances Powever do noL hlde under a rock MonlLor Lhe crlLlclsm Lo
undersLand lf and how lL may harm your repuLaLlon and brand

lf one decldes Lo respond Lo soclal medla crlLlclsm lL may be done ln Lhe same medlum LhaL Lhe orlglnal
crlLlclsm occurred lor example when legal markeLer Larry 8odlne called me a crank and appeared Lo defend
an uneLhlcal and mlsleadlng markeLlng pracLlce when l ouLed a fellow legal markeLer who was pracLlclng Soclal
Medla CredenLlal lraud l responded Lo 8odlne by sLaLlng Lhe facLs and Lhe law Lo rebuL hls poslLlon Slnce l was
correcL abouL Lhe law and facLs he has noL responded

AnoLher way Lo respond Lo soclal medla crlLlclsm ls Lo flle a lawsulL agalnsL Lhose who have dlrecLed crlLlclsm
Lowards you Cn Aprll 1 2011 1he WashlngLon osL wroLe a sLory abouL lawyer !oseph 8akofskys handllng of
hls flrsL Lrlal 8akofskys flrsL Lrlal dld noL go as planned lL ended ln a mlsLrlal and accordlng Lo Lhe WashlngLon
osL Lhe [udge ln Lhe case lndlcaLed among oLher Lhlngs LhaL 8akofsky dld noL have good grasp of legal
procedures SubsequenLly Lhe Amerlcan 8ar AssoclaLlon 1homson 8euLers and oLher wellrespecLed medla
ouLleLs and lawyers dlscussed Lhls case ln LradlLlonal medla ouLleLs on blogs 1wlLLer lacebook and oLher
soclal medla plaLforms

lL appears LhaL 8akofsky was noL pleased LhaL he was crlLlclzed so he declded Lo sue everyone he belleved had
crlLlclzed hlm and he has alleged LhaL Lhe crlLlclsm rose Lo defamaLlon ScoLL Creenfleld has nlcknamed Lhe
case 8akofsky v lnLerneL

Some of Lhe alleged facLs of Lhls maLLer lnclude
1) 1hls was 8akofskys flrsL Lrlal whlch was also a felony murder case
2) 8akofsky was noL llcensed Lo pracLlce law ln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon upon whlch Lhe case orlglnaLed and needed Lo
be admlLLed pro hac vlce ln order Lo handle hls flrsL Lrlal
3) ln paragraph 102 (p23) of 8akofskys complalnL he sLaLes as a resulL of Lhe blaLanL alllance beLween !udge
!ackson and Lhe AuSA
4) ln paragraph 111 (p28) of 8akofskys complalnL lL appears he ls accuslng a [udge of lnLenLlonally publlshlng
on Lhe record slanderous and defamaLory sLaLemenLs agalnsL hlm
3) ln paragraph 122 (p33) of 8akofskys complalnL he Lrles Lo explaln LhaL he used an unforLunaLe shorLhand
word (Lrlck) whlle sLaLlng ln an emall Lo hls lnvesLlgaLor lease Lrlck(old lady) lnLo admlLLlng

8akofsky should have learned Lo walk before he ran wlLh a murder case Cnes flrsL Lrlal should noL be
defendlng an alleged murderer 1he above polnLs and Lhe resL of Lhe complalnL demonsLraLes LhaL 8akofsky
may noL undersLand Lhe legal deflnlLlon of defamaLlon 8akofsky makes unfounded allegaLlons agalnsL a [udge
a prosecuLor reporLers members of Lhe medla and fellow aLLorneys uoes 8akofsky belleve LhaL Lhe new
!ersey 8ules of rofesslonal ConducL for Lhe Lawyers (and n? and uC even Lhough he ls only barred ln n!) and
Lhe l1C AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons do noL apply Lo hlm?

Accordlng Lo Lhe ulsLrlcL of Columbla 8ules of rofesslonal ConducL lL appears LhaL 8akofsky may be engaglng
ln Lhe unauLhorlzed pracLlce of law ln WashlngLon uC ln an adverLlsemenL LhaL appears Lo llsL 8akofskys
WashlngLon uC address (a 8egus vlrLual offlce address) lL may provlde Lhe lmpresslon LhaL 8akofsky ls a
WashlngLon uC barred lawyer 8akofsky may wanL Lo revlew ln re 8anks 361 A2d 138 (uC 1987) and
8rookens v CommlLLee on unauLhorlzed racLlce of Law 338 A2d 1120 (uC 1988) 8akofskys acLlons (ex
obLalnlng a uC vlrLual offlce address wlLhouL a uC llcense) may demonsLraLe an lnLenL Lo clrcumvenL Lhe uC
8ar rules

1aklng legal acLlon agalnsL Lhose who have crlLlclzed you vla soclal medla should only be done afLer all oLher
opLlons have falled and only when one has Lhe law and facLs on hls slde llllng a lawsulL agalnsL 1he
WashlngLon osL 1he Amerlcan 8ar AssoclaLlon 1homson 8euLers and numerous oLher enLlLles and aLLorneys
wlll noL resLore ones repuLaLlon 1he besL way for an aLLorney Lo bulld hls repuLaLlon ls Lhrough eLhlcal
conducL hard work and successful cllenL represenLaLlon uneLhlcal conducL mlsleadlng adverLlslng and
unsuccessful cllenL ouLcomes are noL Lhe bulldlng blocks for a successful legal career

1he only reason l dld noL address Lhe 8akofsky Affalr earller ls LhaL l was busy dlscusslng Soclal Medla
CredenLlal lraud and l felL all of Lhose who 8akofsky sued sald everyLhlng LhaL needed Lo be sald abouL Lhe
maLLer 1he moral of Lhe sLory ls ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age young lawyers should noL follow !oseph 8akofskys
playbook

8akofsky should drop hls lawsulL before lL furLher desLroys hls llfe 1hls slLuaLlon should serve as a flnal exam
hypoLheLlcal ln every law school LhroughouL Lhe counLry

lf 8akofsky Lakes legal acLlon agalnsL me and/or my law flrm for Lhls posL or any pasL or fuLure posLs l wlll flle a
complalnL agalnsL hlm wlLh Lhe new ?ork new !ersey and WashlngLon uC ALLorney Crlevance CommlLLees
Lhe lederal 1rade Commlsslon and l wlll flle a counLer sulL 1o paraphrase CllnL LasLwood 8akofsky go
ahead MAkL M? uA?!

1o learn how Lo respond Lo soclal medla crlLlclsm you may conLacL me aL
hLLp//shearlawcom/aLLorney_proflle

osLed May 14 2011

Wlll ?our Soclal Medla LxperLs Advlce vlolaLe Lhe l1C AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons?Wlll your soclal medla experLs
advlce and/or acLlons vlolaLe Lhe lederal 1rade Commlsslons AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons? 1hls ls a quesLlon you
may wanL Lo answer before you engage a soclal medla guru for your company

Soclal Medla CredenLlal lraud ls a growlng problem Soclal Medla CredenLlal lraud occurs when someone
uLlllzes soclal medla Lo creaLe a false lmpresslon LhaL Lhey are an experL ln Lhelr professlon for commerclal
galn under Lhe l1Cs AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons lL ls crysLal clear LhaL engaglng ln unfalr or decepLlve acLs or
pracLlces ls unlawful

l belleve lL ls lmporLanL Lo dlscuss Lhls lssue agaln because a selfdescrlbed soclal medla experL sLarLed
followlng me agaln Loday on 1wlLLer 1hls soclal medla experL followed me lasL year and Lhen as soon as l
followed hlm back he unfollowed me Cf course l unfollowed hlm back because l only followed hlm ln Lhe
flrsL place because he lnlLlally followed me 1hls soclal medla experLs 1wlLLer feed mosLly conslsLs of publlc
conversaLlons wlLh a small group of hls frlends and/or fellow legal markeLers sLraLeglc loursquare checklns
and reposLs of hls old arLlcles and blog posLs Lvery once ln awhlle he wlll posL a llnk Lo an lnLeresLlng arLlcle
wrlLLen by someone else unforLunaLely he mosLly clogs hls 1wlLLer feed wlLh useless and selfservlng
lnformaLlon so l wlll noL be followlng hlm back Slnce l wlll noL be followlng hlm back he wlll unfollow me ln
Lhe near fuLure l guaranLee lL

1hls soclal medla experL ls desperaLe Lo keep hls followers above 41000 l mean Muammar Cadhafl
desperaLe Pls whole persona ls based on Lhe lmpresslon LhaL he ls a soclal medla experL and has a large
organlc 1wlLLer followlng lf he dld noL pracLlce Soclal Medla CredenLlal lraud he would be followlng Lens of
Lhousands of more people Lhan are followlng hlm back LasL year he wroLe a blog posL LhaL sald someLhlng
along Lhe llnes l unfollowed almosL 30000 people ln Lhls raLlonallzlng posL he sLaLed LhaL he could no
longer focus on new followers so lL was Llme Lo do a mass unfollow

uoes Lhls soclal medla experL Lhlnk he ls Lady Caga or 8rlLney Spears? Lady Caga follows 144000+ people
and 8rlLney Spears follows more Lhan 413000 people on 1wlLLer Would Lady Caga or 8rlLney Spears ever un
follow 30000 people Lo beLLer focus on Lhelr mosL dle hard fans? AbsoluLely noL 1herefore Lhls self descrlbed
soclal medla experLs explanaLlon why he dld a mass unfollow ls noL bellevable 1he soclal medla experL
has unfollowed aL leasL 30000 people Lo hlde Lhe facL LhaL he needs Lo flrsL follow Lens of Lhousands of
people before some of Lhose people he lnlLlally followed follow hlm back

Cn !anuary 13 2011 Lhls soclal medla experL was followlng 4417 people and had 41049 followers As of
Lhls wrlLlng he ls followlng 7000 people and has only 41009 followers ln approxlmaLely 23 monLhs Lhls
soclal medla experL has followed 2383 more people buL has losL 40 followers 1hls sLaLlsLlc demonsLraLes
LhaL Lhls person ls a soclal medla experL aL one Lhlng followlng Lens of Lhousands of people on 1wlLLer and
unfollowlng Lens of Lhousands of people on 1wlLLer 1haL ls lL

lf your soclal medla experL ls personally engaglng ln acLlvlLy LhaL may vlolaLe Lhe l1Cs AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons
you may wanL Lo ask yourself wlll he advlse my company Lo do anyLhlng unlawful or uneLhlcal? lf a soclal
medla experL appears Lo have greaL soclal medla credenLlals Lake a look beyond Lhe numbers Lo deLermlne
how Lhey were achleved erform your due dlllgence and fully revlew all soclal medla acLlvlLy lf a soclal medla
experL appears Lo have celebrlLy llke 1wlLLer lollowlng Lo lollowers flgures Lhere ls a good posslblllLy LhaL
Soclal Medla CredenLlal lraud ls lnvolved

1o learn more abouL soclal medla eLhlcs and Lo learn how Lo avold vlolaLlng Lhe l1C AdverLlslng 8egulaLlons
you may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed Aprll 1 2011

CourLney Love Agrees Lo ay $430000 ln 1wlLLer uefamaLlon CaseCourLney Love has agreed Lo pay uawn
Slmorangklr $430000 over allegaLlons LhaL Love LweeLed false and defamLory sLaLemenLs abouL Slmorangklr ln
2009 Love was upseL over a $4000 cloLhlng paymenL Lo Slmorangklr and 1weeLed abouL Lhe dlsagreemenL ln
a serles of 1weeLs LhaL made headllnes

My hope ls LhaL Lhls case wlll puL people on noLlce Lo be careful abouL whaL ls posLed onllne because Lhere
may be legal consequences for your 1weeLs lacebook and MySpace posLs and any oLher user generaLed
conLenL LhaL ls creaLed

1o learn more abouL Lhe legal and enLerLalnmenL ramlflcaLlons of your 1weeLs or oLher soclal medla posLs you
may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed March 4 2011

Legal LlablllLles of Soclal Medla AdverLlslng1here are many legal llablllLy lssues lnherenL wlLh soclal medla
adverLlslng campalgns Some legal lssues Lo be aware of lnclude copyrlghL and Lrademark lssues prlvacy l1C
adverLlslng guldellnes and full dlsclosure vlolaLlons eLc

l recenLly aLLended a conference and one of Lhe panels conslsLed of a group of markeLlng professlonals 1he
markeLers wanLed Lo creaLe an adverLlslng campalgn for a flaL screen Lelevlslon company 1he hypoLheLlcal
promoLlon would encourage consumers Lo vldeoLape Lhemselves smashlng Lhelr old Lube Lelevlslon seLs and
Lhen upload Lhe vldeo Lo a webslLe 1he flaL screen Lelevlslon company would reward Lhose who uploaded
Lhelr Lelevlslon smashlng vldeos wlLh a new flaL screen Lelevlslon ln addlLlon Lhe consumer who had Lhe
coolesL vldeo would wln $100000

AL flrsL glance Lhls hypoLheLlcal sounds llke lL would be a successful promoLlon Who wouldnL wanL Lo waLch a
bunch of people smashlng Lhelr Lelevlslon seLs? 1hls adverLlslng campalgn sounds llke lL may be lnsplred by a
Callagher (go Lo 700 ln Lhe cllp) comedy rouLlne and/or Lhe !ackass Lelevlslon serles/movle franchlse

WaLchlng Callagher smash waLermelons and/or oLher frulLs ls sLlll exLremely funny Powever Callagher ls a
professlonal waLermelon smasher and comlc and generally flylng waLermelon wlll noL cause permanenL
damage Lo an audlence member ln addlLlon audlence members may be deemed Lo have assumed Lhe rlsk of
aLLendlng hls show lf Lhey are hlL wlLh some flylng waLermelon or oLher relaLed flylng frulL 1hls Lype of
scenarlo may be analogous Lo aLLendlng a baseball game and belng hlL wlLh a foul ball

!ackass was a Lelevlslon serles (and laLer a movle franchlse) on M1v LhaL conLalned acLors who performed
lnLeresLlng sLunLs 1o reduce Lhe posslblllLy of lawsulLs M1v had dlsclalmers and warnlngs llsLed and
menLloned before durlng and afLer each show ln addlLlon Lhe Lelevlslon serles dld noL encourage lLs vlewers
Lo perform Lhe acLlvlLles LhaL were deplcLed

ln conLrasL Lo boLh Callagher and !ackass Lhls hypoLheLlcal Lelevlslon adverLlslng campalgn encourages Lhe
desLrucLlon of a plece of elecLronlc equlpmenL LhaL may conLaln dangerous chemlcals and/or maLerlals by
consumers 1hls Lype of encouraged behavlor may hurL consumers and/or oLhers who are exposed Lo Lhe
encouraged acLlvlLles

Lven Lhough a company may puL ln place a walver and/or oLher means Lo Lry llmlL Lhelr llablllLy and/or Lo Lry Lo
ensure LhaL parLlclpanLs assume all rlsks assoclaLed wlLh Lhe adverLlslng campalgn a lawyer for an ln[ured
parLlclpanL may sLlll flle a lawsulL agalnsL Lhe company and uLlllze a creaLlve Lheory of llablllLy 1herefore
before a company decldes Lo do an adverLlslng campalgn wlLh a soclal medla componenL lL should ask lLs legal
deparLmenL and/or ouLslde legal counsel Lo fully revlew Lhe proposal Lo ensure LhaL lL doesnL creaLe any
unforeseen poLenLlal legal llablllLles

1o learn more abouL abouL Lhe rlsks and unforeseen legal llablllLles of your soclal medla adverLlslng campalgns
you may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed lebruary 12 2011

nlL 1eams and LxecuLlves MusL 8e Aware of Lhe Legal Consequences of 1helr Soclal Medla usagenlL Leams
and Lhelr execuLlves musL be very careful when uLlllzlng soclal medla A few weeks ago l relLeraLed why
professlonal aLhleLes and enLerLalners musL exerclse cauLlon when uLlllzlng soclal medla 1haL posL was ln
response Lo 8alLlmore 8avens Serglo klndles LweeLs abouL hls medlcal condlLlon and hls subsequenL uul
arresL Cn !anuary 3 2011 !ohn Llway sLarLed LweeLlng soon afLer he became LxecuLlve vlce resldenL of
looLball CperaLlons for Lhe uenver 8roncos based upon Lhe recommendaLlon of Lhe 8roncos CommunlcaLlons
ueparLmenL

!ohn Llway and Lhe uenver 8roncos recelved a Lremendous amounL of poslLlve press by Lhe naLlonal medla for
converslng and engaglng wlLh nlL fans SporLs wrlLers and bloggers came ouL of Lhe woodwork Lo exclalm
how refreshlng lL was for an nlL franchlse Lo uLlllze soclal medla lL was one blg love fesL beLween members of
Lhe medla and Lhe sporLs blog communlLy

lor several years l have been predlcLlng LhaL professlonal sporLs wlll embrace soclal medla l am a fan of
uLlllzlng soclal medla buL as a lawyer l advlse my cllenLs of Lhe numerous poLenLlal legal llablllLles LhaL soclal
medla may pose for users unforLunaLely for !ohn Llway and Lhe uenver 8roncos Llways soclal medla usage
may have already creaLed some poLenLlal legal llablllLy lssues

nlL Leams and Lhelr execuLlves should never 1weeL how an lnLervlew wenL Cn !anuary 9Lh Llway 1weeLed
lnLervlews wlLh erry lewell and Lrlc SLudesvllle wenL well Loday Were looklng forward Lo speaklng wlLh !ohn
lox on Monday uo execuLlves from CocaCola or epsl dlscuss who Lhey lnLervlewed for hlgh proflle
poslLlons or how Lhe lnLervlew wenL? no So nelLher should Lhe uenver 8roncos or any oLher nlL Leam WhaL
would happen lf an nlL execuLlve 1weeLed abouL meeLlng wlLh some buL noL every slngle coachlng candldaLe
and a candldaLe who would have complled wlLh Lhe 8ooney 8ule was noL menLloned? Could Lhls lnfer non
compllance wlLh Lhe 8ooney 8ule?

!ohn Llway also 1weeLed abouL 1lm 1ebows sLaLus wlLh Lhe 8roncos ln a serles of 3 LweeLs on !anuary 8Lh
whlch may have been ln response Lo a reporL by eLer klng LhaL lmplled LhaL 1ebow may be Lraded nlL Leams
should never 1weeL abouL Lhe sLaLus of Lhelr currenL pasL or poLenLlal fuLure employees

ln addlLlon Lo poLenLlal employmenL law llablllLy lssues LhaL nlL Leams and Lhelr execuLlves musL be aware of
when uLlllzlng soclal medla some oLher poLenLlal legal llablllLy lssues may lnclude
uefamaLlonlor example CourLney Love ls belng sued due Lo Lhe commenLs she made on 1wlLLer and l belleve
Lhls may be Lhe beglnnlng of a Lrend
CopyrlghL and 1rademark lssuesuo you have Lhe legal rlghL Lo posL a parLlcular phoLo onllne? !usL because a
phoLograph or vldeo ls onllne does noL mean lL ls avallable for all Lo reposL
l1C AdverLlslng Culdellneslull dlsclosure of relaLlonshlps musL be lndlcaLed on every posL LhaL may be an
adverLlsemenL
rlvacy lssuesubllc flgures musL be careful abouL whom Lhey lnLeracL wlLh onllne because Lhelr lnLeracLlons
may have unforeseen consequences LhaL may rlse Lo legal llablllLy

1herefore nlL Leams and Lhelr execuLlves musL be exLremely careful when uLlllzlng soclal medla Lo ensure
LhaL Lhey avold any poLenLlal legal llablllLy Converslng and engaglng wlLh fans onllne may garner a loL of
poslLlve medla aLLenLlon buL Lhere are serlous legal llablllLy lssues LhaL users need Lo be aware of lf Lhey wanL
Lo have a successful and nonllLlglous soclal medla experlence

1o learn more abouL Lhe legal lssues LhaL your may affecL your soclal medla usage you may conLacL me aL
hLp//wwwshearlawcom

osLed !anuary 18 2011

uld a Soclal Medla CcLober Surprlse uerall Lhe uS 2022 World Cup 8ld?1here wlll be a Lremendous amounL
of soul searchlng ln Lhe comlng weeks from Lhe uS soccer communlLy regardlng lLs falled 2022 World Cup bld
uS bld chalrman Sunll CulaLl dld everyLhlng legally posslble Lo brlng Lhe World Cup compeLlLlon back Lo Lhe
unlLed SLaLes CulaLl Lraveled all over Lhe world and enllsLed resldenL CllnLon and Cscar wlnner Morgan
lreeman for Lhe flnal presenLaLlon unforLunaLely LhaL was noL enough CaLar was awarded Lhe 2022 World
Cup

AfLer lllA announced who would hosL Lhe 2022 World Cup CulaLl sLaLed Can l slL here Loday and say Lhese
are Lhe seven Lhlngs LhaL we would do dlfferenL? nol Lhlnk we dld everyLhlng we could resldenL Cbama
welghed ln and sLaLed lL was Lhe wrong declslon As a uS soccer fan l am dlsappolnLed abouL Lhe ouLcome
Powever l am noL surprlsed

Accordlng Lo LSn Lhe uS bld far exceeded lLs rlvals ln Lhe areas of LlckeLlng medla rlghLs llcenslng
hosplLallLy and sponsorshlp Pavlng Lhe besL bld or plLch does noL guaranLee success Lven Lhough Lhere have
been accusaLlons LhaL grafL may have occurred durlng Lhe bld process Lhe boLLom llne ls LhaL Lhe uS wlll noL
be hosLlng Lhe 2022 World Cup

ln my oplnlon Lhe laLesL WlklLeaks documenL release may have swayed Lhe voLers ln oLher words Soclal
Medla may have been Lhe cause of Lhe uS noL belng Lhe hosL of Lhe 2022 World Cup Some of my colleagues
may Lhlnk l am off my rocker and LhaL l sound llke a modern day lox Mulder rlghL ouL of Lhe xllles Powever
durlng Lhe pasL several days Lhe WlklLeaks uS cable documenL release has domlnaLed lnLernaLlonal news
1hls sLory has been on Lhe cover of every ma[or news publlcaLlon all over Lhe world ?ou had Lo be llvlng ln a
cave wlLhouL a modern day elecLronlc devlce noL Lo hear abouL lL

WlklLeaks ls a webslLe LhaL relles on user generaLed conLenL Accordlng Lo lLs webslLe lL ls a nonproflL medla
organlzaLlon dedlcaLed Lo brlnglng lmporLanL news and lnformaLlon Lo Lhe publlc Cn november 28 2010
WlklLeaks made avallable on lLs webslLe more Lhan 230000 secreL uS dlplomaLlc cables 1he facL LhaL
WlklLeaks was able Lo obLaln Lhese secreL cables ln Lhe flrsL place demonsLraLes LhaL Lhe uS has a serlous
problem wlLh daLa securlLy LhaL l am hoplng wlll be resolved ln Lhe near fuLure Powever Lhe conLenL lnslde
some of Lhe cables provldes Lhe lmpresslon LhaL members of Lhe uS SLaLe ueparLmenL are acLlvely spylng
whlch vlolaLes several lnLernaLlonal LreaLles 1hls allegaLlon along wlLh many oLher embarrasslng revelaLlons
such as how uS dlplomaLs vlew some world leaders was noL helpful Lo Lhe uS World Cup bld

lf l was a World Cup voLer from anoLher counLry l may have been very angry aL Lhe uS and may have have
Laken my anger ouL agalnsL lL by voLlng for CaLar l may have asked myself lf Lhe World Cup ls held ln Lhe uS
wlll my fellow counLrymen and dlplomaLs have Lo worry abouL belng spled on durlng Lhe compeLlLlon?

lL appears LhaL WlklLeaks has been ln possesslon of Lhese documenLs for some Llme 1herefore why were
Lhese documenLs released [usL a few days before Lhe World Cup voLe? Was Lhls release an CcLober Surprlse
LhaL was done wlLh Lhe preclslon akln Lo a smarL bomb? ls WlklLeaks parL of a modern day SLC18L (Speclal
LxecuLlve for CounLer lnLelllgence 1errorlsm 8evenge and LxLorLlon) LhaL wreaked havoc on Lhe world ln Lhe
!ames 8ond books and movles? 1he laLesL WlklLeaks documenL release ls exLremely pollLlcally damaglng and lL
appears LhaL lL was lnLenLlonally Llmed Lo lnfllcL maxlmum pollLlcal and economlc damage on Lhe unlLed
SLaLes Why else were Lhe documenLs released over 1hanksglvlng weekend [usL before Lhe World Cup voLe?

1o learn how Lo creaLe and execuLe a soclal medla crlsls plan you may conLacL me aL
hLLp//wwwshearlawcom/

osLed uecember 2 2010

8reLL lavre SexLlng and Soclal Medla Crlsls ManagemenL8reLL lavre Lhe nlL and Lhe MlnnesoLa vlklngs have
a soclal medla publlc relaLlons crlsls LhaL needs Lo be resolved lmmedlaLely 1hls maLLer was allegedly caused
by 8reLL lavres lnnaproprlaLe use of soclal medla and elecLronlc communlcaLlon devlces

Accordlng Lo ueadspln ln 2008 whlle 8reLL lavre was playlng for Lhe new ?ork !eLs he conLacLed !eLs hosLess
!enn SLerger mullLple Llmes ln order Lo spend some personal Llme wlLh her lL appears LhaL Ms SLerger was
noL lnLeresLed ln spendlng personal Llme wlLh lavre Cn ueadsplncoms webslLe lL ls also alleged LhaL lavre
may have Lrled Lo have lnapproprlaLe conLacL wlLh oLher females who had some Lype of professlonal
relaLlonshlp wlLh Lhe !eLs organlzaLlon 1he messages allegedly lefL by lavre on SLergers volce mall appear Lo
be very Lroubllng ln addlLlon lL ls alleged LhaL lavre senL pornographlc phoLos of hlmself elecLronlcally Lo
SLerger

Cn uecember 2 2009 and on uecember 10 2009 l dlscussed how 1lger Woods should handle hls soclal medla
crlsls unforLunaLely Woods dld noL follow my advlce and he losL hls famlly hls repuLaLlon mllllons of dollars
ln endorsemenLs and Lhe ablllLy Lo focus on hls professlonal career

As of Lhls wrlLlng 8reLL lavre has noL publlcly addressed ln deLall Lhls maLLer and has reporLedly only
apologlzed Lo hls LeammaLes for belng a dlsLracLlon lavre has sald llLLle Lo Lhe medla regardlng Lhe allegaLlons
agalnsL hlm Powever lavre has noL sLaLed LhaL he ls lnnocenL of Lhese allegaLlons

lf lavre dlrecLly addresses Lhls maLLer he has Lo be careful abouL whaL he says because Lhere may be legal
lssues ln addlLlon Lo Lhe nlL personal conducL pollcy lssues LhaL need Lo be resolved AL flrsL glance lL appears
LhaL any posslble legal lssues may only be clvll and noL crlmlnal ln naLure Cne posslble legal lssue may be
sexual harassmenL Powever Lhls slLuaLlon ls fluld and may change dependlng on Lhe facLs uncovered

1herefore l advlse lavre Lo do whaL l advlsed Woods Lo do slL down wlLh your legal counsel and Lell Lhem
exacLly whaL happened so your legal Leam can drafL and execuLe a sLraLegy LhaL wlll keep your repuLaLlon
lnLacL lavres relaLlonshlp wlLh hls famlly fans sponsors (Lx Wrangler) Lhe nlL communlLy eLc depends on
lavre worklng closlng wlLh hls legal Leam Lo resolve Lhls maLLer l would haLe Lo see lavre experlence Lhe same
Lype of downward splral LhaL has engulfed 1lger Woods

1hls maLLer should be a wake up call Lo everyone Lo waLch whaL you posL on Lhe lnLerneL ln parLlcular you
should be careful abouL whaL you wrlLe ln an emall whaL you say ln a volce mall or LexL message and whaL
you posL on a soclal medla slLe such as lacebook MySpace and 1wlLLer eLc

1o learn how Lo proLecL your soclal medla proflle you may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed CcLober 13 2010

roLecLlng ?our Soclal Medla roflle AgalnsL 1exL SpamCn Aprll 29 2010 l sLaLed why Lhe Soclal Medla rlvacy
roLecLlon AcL ls needed l relLeraLed my poslLlon agaln on !uly 23 2010 l dld noL wake up Lhlnklng abouL
prlvacy lssues Powever when l logged lnLo my Coogle accounL Lhls mornlng l recelved Lhe message WhaL
would happen lf you losL access Lo your Coogle AccounL Lomorrow? 1he screen llsLed my emall address and
requesLed my cell phone number ln case l need Lo reseL my password

ln my oplnlon password reseLs vla cell phone SMS ls a ruse Lo obLaln access Lo your cell phone number so Lhe
number may be used aL a laLer daLe Lo perform moblle markeLlng Soclal Medla companles are Lrylng Lo collecL
as much lnformaLlon abouL Lhelr users as posslble because Lhey are bulldlng a moneLlzable daLa bank As Lhe
8rlLs may say brllllanL

Coogle may argue LhaL a cell phone number ls Lhe easlesL and mosL secure way for a consumer Lo obLaln a
password reseL l dlsagree 1he besL way Lo do Lhls ls vla emall and/or a personal securlLy quesLlon Coogle
recenLly flred an employee for accesslng Lhe personal accounLs of lLs users !usL Lhlnk of all Lhe posslblllLles
when prlvaLe companles (noL Lhe governmenLwhole dlfferenL conversaLlon) have access Lo Lhls Lype of
personal lnformaLlon

Soclal Medla companles are Lrylng Lo enLlce Lhelr users Lo Lurn over as much of Lhelr personal lnformaLlon as
posslble unforLunaLely Loo many consumers are freely provldlng Soclal Medla companles Lhelr lnformaLlon
wlLhouL a second LhoughL lor example Lhere ls no reason for any company Lo ask for or for anyone Lo llsL
Lhelr rellglon on Lhelr soclal medla proflle

When l recenLly Lrled asslsLlng a frlend of mlne wlLh obLalnlng a personal u8L for hls lacebook accounL lL
requesLed a cell phone number for conflrmaLlon When l obLalned my personal u8L soon afLer consumers
were allowed Lo do so l dld noL need Lo provlde a cell phone number Soclal Medla companles wanL your cell
phone number so Lhey can moneLlze Lhls lnformaLlon

1he boLLom llne ls LhaL people need Lo be careful abouL provldlng any daLa Lo Lhlrd parLles uo you really wanL
Lo be bombarded aL some polnL ln Lhe fuLure wlLh spam LexL messages LhaL you wlll have Lo pay for?
1herefore unless a company needs your cell phone number do noL provlde lL

1o learn how Lo proLecL your Soclal Medla roflle you may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed SepLember 17 2010

Soclal lugln ConLracLs and Show Me 1he Moneyln Lhe lasL few monLhs lacebook has been asklng companles
Lo lnsLall Lhe lacebook Llke buLLon on corporaLe web slLes and on lndlvldual arLlcles lacebooks Llke
buLLon ls a soclal plugln and soclal pluglns are all Lhe craze rlghL now A soclal plugln enables oLher users or
your onllne frlends Lo see whaL Lypes of lnformaLlon lnLeresL you lor example Lo uLlllze a lacebook soclal
plugln LhaL ls lnsLalled on a webslLe a lacebook user musL be logged lnLo Lhelr lacebook accounL Cnce a
lacebook user ls logged lnLo Lhelr accounL Lhey can Llke a parLlcular webslLe or arLlcle on a webslLe LhaL has
lnsLalled lacebooks soclal plugln

lf a user responds Lo a soclal plugln lL enables Lhe company who provldes Lhe soclal plugln Lo collecL daLa
abouL your lnLeracLlon lor example lf 1he Wall SLreeL !ournal lnsLalls lacebooks Llke 8uLLon on lLs arLlcles lL
enables lacebook Lo collecL valuable daLa abouL 1he Wall SLreeL !ournals readers 1he Wall SLreeL !ournal ls
able Lo see how many lacebook users llke an arLlcle buL Lhls daLa ls much more valuable Lo lacebook Lhan
1he Wall SLreeL !ournal because lL enables lacebook Lo capLure ln Lhe aggregaLe a Lremendous amounL of daLa
abouL lLs users

lacebooks soclal plugln sLraLegy ls brllllanL lacebook ls asklng companles Lo lnsLall Lhelr soclal plugln for free
and lL appears companles are bllndly dolng so because lacebook ls becomlng Lhe led lper of Soclal Medla
Cnce a company lnsLalls lacebooks Llke 8uLLon lacebook ls Lhen able Lo collecL daLa abouL a companys
webslLe users vla Llke 8uLLon usage lacebook moneLlzes Lhe Llke 8uLLon daLa ln whaL may be Lhe holy
grall of adverLlslng

Soclal pluglns are parL of lacebooks moneLlzaLlon sLraLegy slnce lacebook ls uLlllzlng Lhe lnformaLlon
obLalned from Lhe usage of soclal pluglns Lo sell adverLlslng lf a company lncorporaLes lacebooks soclal plug
lns lnLo Lhelr webslLe lacebook should pay a company for uLlllzlng Lhls valuable real esLaLe A soclal plugln
conLracL may mlrror ln some respecLs a cell phone Lower leaslng conLracL slnce a webslLe ls a plece of vlrLual
real esLaLe LhaL may have as much or more value as some pleces of real properLy 1herefore lf lacebook asks
your company Lo lnsLall lLs soclal plugln lacebook needs Lo show your company Lhe money

osLed AugusL 17 2010

Marylands Soclal Medla LlecLlon 8egulaLlons Are a Model lor Lhe 8esL of Lhe unlLed SLaLes1hls pasL week Lhe
sLaLe of Maryland passed soclal medla elecLlon regulaLlons LhaL requlre candldaLes for sLaLe pollLlcal offlce Lo
lnclude an auLhorlLy llne on all of Lhelr campalgn soclal medla accounLs Maryland ls Lechnlcally Lhe second
sLaLe ln Lhe counLry Lo offlclally address soclal medla usage ln sLaLe pollLlcal campalgns Powever Maryland ls
Lhe flrsL sLaLe Lo proacLlvely creaLe soclal medla regulaLlons before Lhelr elecLlon board was forced Lo do so
because of llLlgaLlon

Soclal medla elecLlon regulaLlons are needed so LhaL voLers are able Lo deLermlne wheLher a soclal medla
accounL Lhey are vlewlng ls parL of a candldaLes offlclal campalgn Cf Lhe mosL wldely uLlllzed soclal medla
plaLforms only 1wlLLer has a process LhaL offlclally verlfles accounLs 1herefore lL ls dlfflculL Lo deLermlne
wheLher Lhe page you are vlewlng ls creaLed by or on behalf of a person an enLlLy or an acLlvlLy

under Marylands new regulaLlons soclal medla ls Lo be LreaLed ln Lhe same manner as oLher campalgn
maLerlal and communlcaLlon lrom a concepLual sLandpolnL soclal medla ls an onllne exLenslon of a
candldaLes Lelevlslon radlo or prlnL adverLlsemenLs uue Lo Lhe drasLlc lncrease of soclal medla usage slnce
Lhe lasL elecLlon cycle lL was Llme for pollLlcal soclal medla campalgn uLlllzaLlon Lo be regulaLed lL ls only a
maLLer of Llme before Lhe lederal LlecLlon Commlsslon decldes Lo regulaLe soclal medla for federal campalgns

l worked wlLh Marylands SLaLe 8oard of LlecLlons (8oard) Lo drafL Marylands new soclal medla elecLlon
regulaLlons ln !une Lhe 8oard voLed 40 Lo pass Lhe regulaLlons and earller Lhls week a commlLLee of sLaLe
lawmakers voLed 111 Lo lmplemenL Lhe new regulaLlons for Lhls upcomlng elecLlon cycle 1he regulaLlons
recelved blparLlsan pollLlcal supporL and Lhey were also supporLed by Lhe soclal medla buslness communlLy
1he almosL unanlmous supporL from all of Lhese sLakeholders apparenLly means LhaL l was successful aL
worklng wlLh Lhe 8oard Lo drafL falr and balanced rules

1he regulaLlons are noL onerous on candldaLes and are lnexpenslve Lo follow Also Lhey do noL have any
addlLlonal requlremenLs LhaL go beyond whaL ls requlred for oLher forms of campalgn medla 1he only
drawback wlLh Lhe new regulaLlons ls LhaL Lhey do noL Leach candldaLes how Lo uLlllze soclal medla lrom my
revlew of some of Marylands ma[or pollLlcal candldaLes soclal medla accounLs lL ls apparenL LhaL pollLlclans ln
Maryland need Lhe asslsLance of a soclal medla lawyer Lo Leach Lhem how Lo beLLer deploy Lhelr soclal medla
asseLs

osLed !uly 23 2010

lnLellecLual roperLy Law ls useless ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age1he ma[or Lools LhaL companles have Lo proLecL
Lhelr lnLellecLual properLy rlghLs ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age were creaLed before and durlng Lhe lnLerneL Age of
Lhe laLe 1990s under currenL law copyrlghL and Lrademark holders have several dlfferenL remedles avallable
Lo go afLer cybersquaLLers and Lhose who uLlllze copyrlghLed maLerlal and Lrademarks wlLhouL permlsslon
Some of Lhe Lools avallable lnclude Lhe Lanham AcL and Lhe AnLlCyber SquaLLlng roLecLlon AcL 1he ulglLal
Mlllenlum CopyrlghL AcL and lCAnns unlform uomaln ulspuLe 8esoluLlon ollcy

lacebook MySpace and 1wlLLer (scroll down Lo Lhe CopyrlghL ollcy) and ?ou1ube all have pollcles ln place
for companles Lo reporL LhefL of Lhelr lnLellecLual properLy Lven Lhough some of Lhese companles (Lx
lacebook) appear Lo have a pollcy ln place LhaL addresses Lhe problem when a companys Lrademarks are
belng used by a Lhlrd parLy as a screen/user name Lhere appears Lo be no legal Lools avallable LhaL speclflcally
applles Lo screen/user names 1herefore lL ls aL Lhe sole dlscreLlon of an onllne servlce provlder Lo deLermlne
lf a screen/user name lnfrlnges on a Lrademark

Screen/user name lnLellecLual properLy lnfrlngemenL ls a ma[or problem lor example on lacebook Lhere ls a
popular page LhaL aL flrsL glance appears Lo be nlke Shoes upon closer examlnaLlon even Lhough Lhls page
has over 22 mllllon llkes lL does noL appear Lo be a valld nlke Shoes lacebook page ln addlLlon lf you Lype
ln wwwfacebookcom/nlkeshoes you are dlrecLed Lo an enLlrely dlfferenL lacebook page LhaL appears Lo be
anoLher user vlslLlng MySpaces nlke Shoes age demonsLraLes Lhe same problem lf you Lype ln
wwwmyspacecom/nlkeshoes you wlll noLlce LhaL you are dlrecLed Lo Lhe page of a nlke shoe collecLor/seller

1hrough a qulck check of Lhe unlLed SLaLes aLenL 1rademark 1LSS search sysLem lL appears LhaL nlke Shoes
ls noL Lrademarked Powever nlke was Lrademarked ln 1972 for A1PLL1lC SPCLS Wl1P SlkLS Anu
A1PLL1lC unllC8MS lC8 uSL Wl1P SuCP SPCLS and A1PLL1lC SPCLS Wl1PCu1 SlkLS Anu A1PLL1lC
unllC8MS lC8 uSL Wl1P SuCP SPCLS 1herefore nlke has a very sLrong clalm LhaL Lhe Lerm nlke Shoes
lnfrlnges on lLs Lrademark

1he boLLom llne ls LhaL lnLellecLual properLy law needs Lo caLch up wlLh Lhe Soclal Medla Age and/or soclal
medla companles need Lo be wllllng Lo provlde Lhe conLacL lnformaLlon of Lhose who are charged wlLh
deLermlnlng lf a screen/user name lnfrlnges on a Lrademark or lf posLed maLerlal vlolaLes a copyrlghL
rovldlng forms for lnLellecLual properLy rlghLs holders Lo compleLe when an alleged vlolaLlon occurs ls a sLarL
buL does noL adequaLely address Lhe slLuaLlon More accounLablllLy ls needed

osLed !une 16 2010

Soclal Medla SporLs MarkeLlng and 8randlng1radlLlonal sporLs markeLlng and brand managemenL ls ln
LranslLlon lor years Lhe professlonal sporLs leagues have relled on radlo and prlnL newspapers Lo provlde
Lhem free markeLlng 1he leagues provlded [ournallsLs open access Lo Lhelr games and ln reLurn sporLs wrlLers
would reporL on Lhe games Lhe players and Lhe Leams Lo Lhelr audlence 1hls baslc model worked for many
years When Lelevlslon became popular ln Lhe 1930s Lhe model was Lweaked and Lhe Lelevlslon neLworks
sLarLed Lo pay handsomely for sporLs conLenL ln Lhe 1970s 1ed 1urner once agaln Lweaked Lhe model vla
cable Lelevlslon

Cver Lhe pasL several years we have waLched Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe end of prlnL medla a changlng radlo
landscape and a LransformaLlon from waLchlng Lelevlslon vla cable Lo Lhe lnLerneL 1hls medla LransformaLlon
has changed Lhe sporLs markeLlng and brandlng paradlgm Consumers have become exLremely sophlsLlcaLed
and are Lunlng ouL LradlLlonal adverLlslng eople do noL wanL Lo be sold Lo 1hey wanL Lo engage ln a
conversaLlon wlLh a brand asslon ls Lhe name of Lhe game and Lhe besL medlum Lo harness Lhls passlon ls
soclal medla Soclal medla ls noL [usL Lhe lnLerneL Soclal medla ls abouL lnLeracLlng wlLh a brand and feellng
connecLed Lo lL

1he Lop consumer culL brand ls Apple 1he unquesLloned Amerlcan sporLs culL brand ls Lhe nlL Lach of Lhese
organlzaLlons have spenL years connecLlng wlLh Lhelr followers 1he nlLs culL brand has been forged by Lhe
CreaLesL Came Lver layed 1he lce 8owl and players llke Lhe 8alLlmore ColLs !ohnny unlLas and Lhe
Cleveland 8rowns !lm 8rown Cames and players come and go Powever Lhe experlences LhaL fans have wlLh
Lhese evenLs and Lhe players ls whaL keeps fans exclLed and lnLeresLed ln Lhe nlL

Soclal medla ls all abouL passlon When a lacebook user ls exclLed or upseL he posLs Lo hls lacebook wall ln
response Lhe lacebook users frlends may engage ln a conversaLlon abouL Lhe posL An excellenL example of
Lhls lnLeracLlon occurred on Lhe lacebook page 8eLLy WhlLe Lo PosL SnL (please?)! Lven Lhough 8eLLy WhlLe
has been ln Lhe enLerLalnmenL buslness for more Lhan 60 years she may end up belng besL remembered for
how she became Lhe hosL of an eplsode of SaLurday nlghL Llve

Several monLhs ago a 8eLLy WhlLe fan creaLed a lacebook page requesLlng LhaL 8eLLy WhlLe hosL SaLurday
nlghL Llve 1he lacebook pages popularlLy grew Lo a polnL where Lorne Mlchaels Lhe creaLor of SaLurday
nlghL Llve could noL lgnore lL so he lnvlLed 8eLLy WhlLe Lo hosL Lhe show n8C knew or should have known
LhaL Lhe 8eLLy WhlLe eplsode would have a bullL ln audlence LhaL would enable Lhem Lo sell Lhe adverLlslng for
Lhe eplsode aL a premlum 8eLLy WhlLe was hllarlous on Lhe show and lL was a raLlngs success

8rands need Lo learn how Lo engage wlLh Lhelr cusLomers lf companles undersLand how Lo properly uLlllze
soclal medla Lhey wlll be able Lo beLLer predlcL Lhe success of Lhelr markeLlng campalgns ln addlLlon Lhey wlll
be able Lo fully leverage Lhe value of Lhelr brands Lo oLhers who wanL Lo be connecLed Lo Lhem

unforLunaLely Loo many companles Lhlnk Lhe answer Lo engaglng soclal medla users ls Lo focus Lhelr sLraLegy
on posLlng on Lhelr lacebook wall or LweeLlng abouL new producL llnes and sales and bulldlng appllcaLlons
LhaL capLure a cusLomers prlvaLe lnformaLlon Congress ls ln Lhe process of drafLlng new onllne prlvacy
regulaLlons LhaL may llmlL or change how personal lnformaLlon ls collecLed and uLlllzed 1herefore Lhe currenL
preferred meLhod of obLalnlng a cusLomer or a poLenLlal cusLomers daLa vla an appllcaLlon when a cusLomer
vlslLs a lacebook wall or cllcks on a llnk may soon be obsoleLe

ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age Lhere ls no subsLlLuLe for lnLeracLlve cusLomer engagemenL 8ulldlng a culL followlng ls
achlevable lf your company ls ready wllllng and able Lo creaLe and follow a deLalled sLraLegy 1o learn how Lo
deslgn and lmplemenL a successful soclal medla sporLs markeLlng and brandlng campalgn LhaL wlll ablde by Lhe
soon Lo be enacLed Soclal Medla rlvacy roLecLlon AcL you may conLacL me aL wwwshearlawcom

osLed May 20 2010

LnLerLalnmenL Soclal Medla 8randlng ConLracLs8randlng producLs and servlces and how Lhe law proLecLs your
brand ls exLremely lmporLanL ln Lhe soclal medla age 8ecordlng arLlsLs wrlLers and fllm makers are uLlllzlng
soclal medla Lo creaLe Lhelr brand and Lo lnclude oLher brands ln Lhelr work Lo aLLracL Lhe aLLenLlon of
corporaLe sponsors

8ecenLly a new ?ork 1lmes arLlcle dlscussed how some enLerLalnmenL conLracLs lnclude speclflc brandlng
clauses and LhaL some LalenL feel pressured Lo lnclude cerLaln brands ln Lhelr work Lo aLLracL sponsors
1elevlslon producL placemenL ls noL new uurlng mosL llve Lelevlslon programs Lhe announcers usually sLaLe
LhroughouL Lhe program LhaL Lhe show or evenL ls sponsored by xyz company Cne of Lhe mosL famous movle
producL placemenLs was 8eeses leces ln Lhe movle L1 ln 1982 When l waLched Lhe movle as a chlld l had no
ldea LhaL Lhls was a producL placemenL Powever as an adulL l would expecL LhaL mosL adulLs who waLch Lhe
movle know or should know LhaL lncludlng 8eeses leces promlnenLly ln Lhe movle was a blg adverLlslng coup
for Pershey

under Lhe recenLly revlsed l1C Culdes Concernlng Lhe use of LndorsemenLs and 1esLlmonlals ln AdverLlslng
maLerlal connecLlons beLween adverLlsers and endorsers musL be dlsclosed Powever l am wonderlng when
ls Lhls Lhreshold acLually meL? lor example lf an arLlsL lncludes a brand ln hls work ln Lhe hopes LhaL Lhe brand
wlll end up sponsorlng hls work and Lhen Lhe brand evenLually sponsors Lhe arLlsLs work does Lhls connecLlon
need Lo be dlsclosed slnce Lhe orlglnal work was noL creaLed wlLh a maLerlal connecLlon beLween Lhe arLlsL
and Lhe brand? lf an arLlsL posLs hls orlglnal work on ?ouLube or anoLher soclal medla webslLe before Lhere ls a
maLerlal connecLlon buL laLer a corporaLe sponsor ls aLLracLed Lo Lhe pro[ecL does Lhe arLlsL now need Lo
dlsclose Lhls sponsorshlp?

1hese are some of Lhe many legal lssues LhaL Lhe soclal medla age has creaLed ConsLanLly changlng Lechnology
wlll only make Lhese lssues more dlfflculL Lo analyze

osLed Aprll 6 2010

LnLerLalnmenL and SporLs Soclal Medla 360 uealsLnLerLalnmenL 360 deals have slowly become more prevalenL
ln Lhe enLerLalnmenL lndusLry durlng Lhe pasL several years A 360 deal ls one where a record label or
enLerLalnmenL company slgns LalenL Lo a conLracL LhaL enLlLles Lhe company Lo derlve revenue noL only from
LradlLlonal revenue sLreams such as record sales buL also from all oLher moneLlzeable areas 1hese oLher
revenue sLreams may lnclude endorsemenLs merchandlse sales publlshlng and songwrlLlng 1he revenue
spllLs vary dependlng upon an arLlsLs leverage ln Lhe lndusLry

Mlchael !acksons esLaLe recenLly slgned an agreemenL LhaL appears Lo be whaL l call an LnLerLalnmenL LsLaLe
360 ueal 1he full deLalls of Lhe conLracL have noL been dlsclosed as of Lhls wrlLlng buL lL sounds as Lhough
Lhls agreemenL may break new ground ln Lhe manner ln whlch enLerLalnmenL conLracLs sllce and dlce
lnLellecLual properLy rlghLs Accordlng Lo Lhe new ?ork 1lmes Lhe agreemenL allows Sony and Lhe esLaLe of
Mlchael !ackson Lo collaboraLe on a wlde range of lucraLlve llcenslng arrangemenLs llke Lhe use of !ackson
muslc for fllms Lelevlslon and sLage shows and llnes of memorabllla LhaL wlll be llmlLed only by Lhe
lmaglnaLlon of Lhe esLaLe and Lhe demand of a hungry worldwlde markeL 1hls groundbreaklng agreemenL
appears Lo fully moneLlze Mlchael !acksons esLaLe ln a manner LhaL wlll beneflL Lhe esLaLes helrs
unforLunaLely Mlchael !ackson may have been worLh more dead Lhan allve

Cenerally ln Lhe world of uS professlonal sporLs 360 deals do noL exlsL nlL players have an lncenLlve Lo
qulckly moneLlze Lhelr soclal medla asseLs because on average Lhelr playlng careers lasL approxlmaLely 34
years ln order Lo properly leverage an aLhleLes soclal medla poLenLlal a player needs Lo be boLh LalenLed on
Lhe fleld and have a unlque and engaglng personallLy Chad Cchoclnco has Lhls rare comblnaLlon and Lhls has
enabled hls LwlLLer accounL Lo aLLracL sponsors due Lo hls ablllLy Lo acqulre almosL 800000 followers

As an aLLorney who pracLlces enLerLalnmenL sporLs and soclal medla law l am always looklng for creaLlve
meLhods Lo lncrease my cllenLs revenue sLreams ln my lebruary 3 2010 posL l dlscussed Soclal Medla
LngagemenL roducL lacemenL ConLracLs 1o elaboraLe furLher on Lhls Loplc l wanL Lo dlscuss whaL l call
Soclal Medla 360 ueals ln a Soclal Medla 360 ueal a celebrlLy or professlonal aLhleLes soclal medla asseLs
are uLlllzed Lo creaLe synergy for boLh Lhe cllenL and Lhe sponsor(s) uue Lo Lhe consLanLly changlng Lechnology
of soclal medla an aLLorney musL be well versed ln noL only conLracL law and lnLellecLual properLy buL musL
also fully undersLand Lhe Lechnology and capablllLles of Lhe soclal medla plaLforms lnvolved

osLed March 13 2010

Soclal Medla LngagemenL roducL lacemenL ConLracLsSoclal medla rlghLs ln professlonal sporLs ls golng Lo
soon become one of Lhe blggesL revenue generaLlng sLreams ouLslde of a professlonal players conLracL lL may
Lake several years for Lhls predlcLlon Lo pan ouL buL l guaranLee LhaL Lhls wlll occur ln Lhe near fuLure

1here are only a handful of professlonal aLhleLes who are able Lo obLaln ma[or endorsemenL deals 1he
LradlLlonal form of endorsemenL deals where an aLhleLe such as 1lger Woods ls seen uLlllzlng or sLandlng nexL
Lo a producL ls golng Lo slgnlflcanLly change ln Lhe near fuLure Slnce Lhe 1lger Woods scandal companles are
now golng Lo be exLremely careful abouL puLLlng all of Lhelr eggs ln one baskeL no maLLer how successful an
aLhleLe ls ln Lhelr chosen professlon ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age an aLhleLes lmage can drasLlcally change wlLh one
posLed youLube vldeo Slnce Lhe corporaLe world ls generally rlsk averse many companles wlll soon reallze
LhaL a new endorsemenL paradlgm wlll need Lo be creaLed

1radlLlonal prlnL Lelevlslon and radlo adverLlslng ls dylng a slow deaLh lnLerneL banner ads and Lhe pay per
cllck model ls also ln LranslLlon 1he wave of Lhe fuLure ls whaL l would llke Lo call LngagemenL roducL
lacemenL LngagemenL roducL lacemenL occurs when a pald endorser such as a professlonal aLhleLe ls
hlred Lo engage ln a conversaLlon wlLh hls or her lacebook lans 1wlLLer lollowers or oLher soclal medla
connecLlons abouL a producL or servlce Chad Cchoclnco a wlde recelver for Lhe ClnclnnaLl 8engals has more
Lhan 186000 lacebook lans and almosL 730000 1wlLLer lollowers Clven Chad Cchoclncos popularlLy [usL
lmaglne Lhe opporLunlLles avallable

1he companles who hlre pald endorsers and Lhe aLLorneys for pald endorsers musL be fully versed ln Lhe
lederal 1rade Commlsslons new guldellnes before negoLlaLlng LngagemenL roducL lacemenL ConLracLs
ald endorsers need Lo hlre aLLorneys who undersLand Lhe Lechnology and full power of soclal medla Lo
accounL for Lhe permuLaLlons LhaL exlsL ln Lhls Lype of conLracL

ln Lhe Soclal Medla Age aLLorneys need Lo flnd creaLlve ways Lo address all of Lhe buslness and legal lssues LhaL
accompany soclal medla usage

osLed lebruary 3 2010


$4.,20/,,3//01,2,943
18 September 2011
The transIormation oI traditional concepts oI media has created a range oI complex new challenges Ior media
lawyers. In particular, multiIaceted issues arising Irom social media in the context oI the conventional law oI
deIamation include jurisdictional concerns, responsibility Ior publication and the vast potential Ior damage to
reputation (in addition to contempt and privacy issues). The need to revisit deIamation laws is increasingly
apparent, to ensure both reputation and Ireedom oI expression are adequately protected in the age oI social
media. Corrs Chambers Westgarth Partner and Melbourne Press Club committee member Richard Leder
provides an overview oI some oI the challenges to existing Australian media law posed by social media.
Social media overview

Social media, in general terms, involves communication oI published matter among users oI a particular media
service or hub` Although the category oI social media is broad, it is generally associated with social
networking sites in their capacity as interactive global media Iorums. Familiar examples include Facebook,
Twitter, virtual worlds, and Iile sharing sites, including YouTube and Tumbler. More generally, social media
encompasses internet review sites and personal blogs, Iacilitating communication, dialogue and the interactive
participation oI members; this hybrid use has created a social media phenomena which permits individuals or
organisations to widely publish in an unregulated Iorum.

Social media is clearly distinct Irom industrial media due to, amongst other things, its vast potential Ior
publication, useability and anonymity. As such, it presents challenges to longstanding media laws and
speciIically, deIamation laws, Iar greater than those presented by traditional media. These arise Irom the Iact
that deIamation laws were draIted in an era with no relevance to the particular idiosyncrasies oI social media in
a deIamation context. SpeciIically, it is apparent that there is an increasing divergence between content
published by social media users, and the boundaries protecting reputation established by Australian uniIorm
deIamation laws.

A key point to make at the outset is the global nature oI social media, indeed its geographical creation point
and hub, and the consequential inadequacy oI Australian laws. Social media sites are almost exclusively based
and programmed in the United States, Ior example, Twitter Inc, the company that operates the service and
associated website, is based in San Francisco, CaliIornia, with additional servers and oIIices in San Antonio,
Boston and New York. Facebook and YouTube are also both based and programmed in Palo Alto, CaliIornia,
reIlecting the geographical location oI social media hubs in some oI the most liberal states in the world, at least
in the context oI Ireedom oI expression.

The US provides perhaps the most marked contrast to deIamation laws in comparison to Australia, particularly
in the context oI the current legal position oI media deIendants in deIamation actions. In the United States, the
concept oI Ireedom oI expression is upheld via judicial interpretation and express constitutional protection oI
Iirst amendment jurisprudence.

North American law so values Ireedom oI expression that it is Irequently Iavoured over a plaintiII`s right to
protection oI reputation; by contrast, Australian deIamation laws aim to balance` reputation and Iree speech,
though the reality is that, given the lack oI constitutional Ireedom oI expression, oIten the balance is weighed
in the plaintiII`s Iavour. This position is diIIicult to reconcile with a social media, the new media, that is, Ior
the most part, under-regulated, where control, or lack oI it, is at the heart oI concerns over social media and
protection oI reputation.

New media, old law

This juxtaposition between new media and old law, and the problematic nature oI reconciling Australian
deIamation laws with social media, requires an analysis oI the context in which the Australian uniIorm
deIamation laws (UDL) were draIted. The UDL aimed to address the issues inherent in traditional media and
notionally are thereIore relevant to traditional media dissemination contexts, Ior example, liability Ior
republication, whereby the UDL conIers responsibility Ior republication on every individual who republishes:
the journalist who draIts an article, and the liability that may accrue to the media corporation.

Publication oI course may be made jointly by multiple deIendants, including author, editor, printer and
distributor; each may be jointly and severally liable.

Liability Ior servants and agents will apply provided the publication was authorised and made in the course oI
employment or within scope oI agent`s authority.

Perhaps no concept in deIamation law more starkly demonstrates the disparity between traditional media and
social media than that oI publication. The High Court oI Australia stated in 2002 in Gutnick v Dow Jones that
the general rule oI internet publication is that deIamation occurs at the place where the material is made
available in comprehensive Iorm, where material is downloaded and read via a web browser, where the tort is
complete and damage to reputation may occur.

This deIinition is clearly conIined to the era in which it was decided, prior to the new media surge oI the last
decade. Despite the increase oI publication potential in a social networking sphere, there is a distinct lack oI
recent High Court oI Australia authority or jurisprudence regarding applicability oI Gutnick principles to social
media, and the increase in general public publishers` via personal blogs, social networking and review sites.

In a social media context, potential Ior sharing published matter, and Ior publication generally, is vast; Ior
example, re-tweeting` pictures, by joining and commenting on walls` oI Facebook groups, by the
republication oI statuses or commenting on photographs accessible by the general public. Social networking
sites permit users oI groups` to be joined without their consent, exponentially increasing potential Ior
republication oI and liability Ior deIamatory material. There is the possible availability oI the UDL deIence oI
innocent dissemination, yet to be tested in the context oI the internet.

It is convenient to consider the notorious AFL St Kilda schoolgirl` scandal. The Iacts perhaps by now do not
necessitate repeating, but in summary, a minor published and claimed ownership oI nude photographs on
Facebook oI two AFL players, on the basis that she had photographed the players, thus asserting ownership
over the photos. It was later revealed that she had obtained the pictures without the consent oI the subjects,
who threatened actions in deIamation and breach oI privacy.

Numerous websites had already republished the content, on the basis that the photographs were owned by the
minor, and had been consented to (providing the obvious contrast to Ettinghausen). In Ettinghausen the
Supreme Court oI New South Wales Iound that the publication oI a nude picture oI a rugby league player had
the capacity to deIame him, by way oI exposure to ridicule.

In the St Kilda case, it was revealed that photos were not owned by the schoolgirl nor consented to, rendering
every individual who had republished the pictures potentially liable Ior deIamation. Further issues oI privacy
and contempt also loomed large, particularly due to the suppression orders in place regarding the minor.
Although deIamation proceedings were later abandoned by the plaintiIIs, the case exempliIied the
juxtaposition oI vulnerability oI both plaintiIIs and potential deIendants to liability,.

Further, the case highlighted the inadequacy oI analogous precedent when dealing with the complexities oI
social media. Ettinghausen was decided in 1993, and related to a magazine publication, immediately recalled
with Iurther publication prevented. It oIIered a direct contrast to the pictorial matter in the St Kilda case,
where it is still possible to google` and locate the oIIending images.

Blurring jurisdictional boundaries

Social media also presents an array oI jurisdictional complexities and has clear potential to damage reputation
in a vast geographical scope. The global nature oI social media also highlights issues regarding appropriate
law and jurisdiction to sue, and the increasingly apparent Iorum shopping` opportunities Ior plaintiIIs. There
is an obvious vulnerability oI private individuals to cyber deIamation and a corresponding diIIiculty oI legal
redress. Further, media and private individual deIendants are exposed to the complexities oI deIending actions
in Ioreign jurisdictions.

A case in point is Evony v Everiss. The case concerned a USA-based online-gaming company plaintiII, with
over 8 million players registered globally. The plaintiII company initiated deIamation proceedings against UK
blogger in the Supreme Court oI NSW. The plaintiII claimed that deIendant had, by suggesting via blog
publication, deIamed the plaintiII by suggesting that the plaintiII sent advertising spam, associated with
Iraudsters and had stolen IP rights Irom other online gaming developers.

Despite the Iact that the plaintiII company was registered in US and that the deIendant was based in the UK,
the plaintiII claimed that the proper Iorum was New South Wales, due to numbers oI online` players located
in Sydney. Despite opposition Irom the deIendant, the global nature oI the online social media business
determined that the plaintiII had an array oI choice regarding where to commence proceedings. The plaintiII
company was eventually Iorced to abandon proceedings due to a huge volume oI anonymous comments
regarding the case posted on internet Iorums and other social media sites, overshadowing the launch oI the
company`s next product and Iurther damaging the company`s reputation. The case exempliIies the need Ior
regulation regarding proper Iorums in which plaintiIIs may sue Ior social media deIamation.

Social media and identiIication

Social media has also clearly increased the potential Ior pictorial deIamation, as users may be unaware that an
unauthorised photograph published via social media, possibly coupled with comments and published without
permission, may be deIamatory.

As previously indicated, social media provides an open Iorum Ior review, blogs, and general public critique.
With unregulated Ireedom oI expression comes increased potential Ior anonymous social media users to
publish deIamatory matter, making it diIIicult Ior plaintiIIs to identiIy the proper deIendant. Where
deIamatory matter has been published, seemingly anonymously` by an unidentiIied original publisher, a
logical course oI action is to bring the claim against the relevant ISP, or entity with capacity to exercise
editorial control over content. The position is somewhat unclear in Australia, with courts having considered
various outdated bulletin board` cases to determine liability. Whilst traditional media allows a plaintiII to sue
Ior non-permanent publication, Ior example, radio broadcast, by contrast, matter published on social media is
viewable by a Iar greater audience and may remain accessible Ior a signiIicant time beIore plaintiII can take
action to remove content. Further, thereaIter deIamatory material remains in cache`, accessible even aIter
deleted.

Intersections: privacy and contempt

Arguably, some oI the most signiIicant implications oI social media include the erosion oI privacy, and it is in
the context oI privacy that law reIorm may occur beIore too long. At present, there are various codes which
attempt to regulate media, such as the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) Journalist`s Code oI
Ethics, Press Council Statement oI Principles, Press Council Privacy Principles (Ior example, when reporting
on death), and Broadcasting Codes oI Practice.

Australia is oI course signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides that
no person should be subject to arbitrary or unlawIul interIerences with their privacy, Iamily, home or
correspondence. Further, some statutory protection is oIIered by the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), although it is
noted that at present media are exempt in circumstances where the organisation is publicly committed to
observing a set oI privacy standards (s7B(4)).

Peripheral protection is oIIered by the InIormation Privacy Act 2000 (Vic) and Health Records Act 2001 (Vic).
It is clear however that calls will continue Ior privacy laws to be revisited to maintain individual`s right to
privacy and to control dissemination oI personal inIormation via social media.

A number oI UK cases have considered privacy hearings and judicial consideration has been directed to
reporting restrictions and privacy in the sphere oI social networking sites. In Robinson v Sunday Newspapers,
the deIendant newspaper had published photographs oI plaintiII during a rehabilitation program. The plaintiII
brought claims including breach oI conIidence, misuse oI private inIormation and harassment. Treacy J
granted an injunction and rejected an initial application Ior the hearing to be held in private, stating there was
no evidence that a public hearing would increase risk oI mental harm to the plaintiII. The plaintiII appealed,
although the Court oI Appeal denied that appeal, stating that whilst the deIendant might honour a reporting
restriction, judicial notice had to be given to social networking sites, stating:

We are satisIied that we should take judicial notice oI the Iact that social networking sites, Twitter and the
internet generally now provide an alternative means oI publication to traditional newspapers..the internet is
diIIicult to control and the source oI publication may be outside the jurisdiction oI the court. there is a real
danger that iI these proceedings were open to the public the inIormation disclosed would be disseminated on
the internet even iI a reporting restriction was imposed.

Social media and deIamation deIences

The availability oI deIamation deIences may be reduced given the operation oI UDL deIences.. For example,
the Iair comment deIence provides a deIence to personal opinion, where that opinion is clearly comment as
opposed to statement oI Iact; Iair comment protects matters oI public interest, provided based on Iact, proper
material and recognised objectively as comment. Fair comment can be deIeated by malice, evidenced by prooI
that the opinion oI the deIendant was distorted, or product oI a judgment warped by malice, or that the author
was prompted by some purpose other than the purpose oI communicating to the interested public the author`s
genuine opinion.

Although it has not been the subject oI much judicial consideration, iI at all, in Australia, the availability oI
the Iair comment deIence may be diIIicult in the context oI social media, due to public lack oI knowledge
about what constitutes deIamatory opinion, Ior example, comments on Tripadvisor, hate pages` on Facebook,
or disparaging remarks on Twitter.

Innocent dissemination provides a common law and statutory deIence where a deIendant can prove they did
not know the published matter was deIamatory, or where the matter was published merely in their capacity or
as employee/agent oI subordinate distributor, where they neither knew or ought to have known that matter was
deIamatory and the lack oI relevant knowledge was not due to negligence. It may be assumed that the deIence
oI innocent dissemination will be more Irequently utilised in social media deIamation actions, and as such,
reIorm to provide a social-media speciIic version oI this deIence may be necessary.

It is important to note section 91(1) Broadcasting Services Amendment (online services) Act 1999, which
provides any law has no eIIect to the extent to which it subjects ISP to liability where the internet service
provider was not aware` oI content. The statute does not impart any requirement oI reasonable care, a
deIiciency which should be queried in the age oI social media.

ReIorm and conclusion

In summary, social media has greatly tested the boundaries oI accessibility and scope oI traditional media. In
doing so, it has highlighted the challenges Iaced by localised uniIorm deIamation laws in dealing with a
globalised media platIorm. The key issues are clearly the inadequacy oI localised Australian uniIorm
deIamation laws when dealing with social media, created Ior the most part in the United States, used globally,
and with little regulation. A tension arises when attempting to reconcile local deIamation law with a global
social media, based in a jurisdiction which values Ireedom oI expression over reputation, a position which can
be clearly contrasted with Australia. Further, it is apparent that Australian courts have had to determine social
media deIamation and contempt cases on the basis oI outdated case law, which clearly relates to a traditional
media context.

It is not the aim oI this paper to provide solutions to these challenges, though a number oI suggestions could be
made. Primarily, some reIorm to existing uniIorm deIamation legislation is suggested. Legislative amendment
could be made particularly in the key areas oI jurisdiction and publication as discussed, to restrict and deIine
jurisdiction and to place more responsibility on servers and social media ISP providers. Further, amendment
or addition oI a targeted deIence Ior publication in a social media context may be necessary.

The need Ior an international treaty, akin to the regulation oI intellectual property or copyright, between
nations is also a consideration; given the global nature oI social media this kind oI regulation is logical, though
clearly involves challenges in implementation, necessitating discussions at an international level.

!udge llnes 8logger $23 Mllllon osLed by cecllyk on uecember 7Lh 2011 aL 1037 pm

So a blogger ln Cregon named CrysLal Cox was flned by a [udge $23 Mllllon dollars because she wroLe posLs
on her blog Lrashlng a corporaLlon and Lhe [udge declded LhaL as a blogger she dld noL have Lhe same
proLecLlon [ournallsLs have Lherefore whaL she was dolng was defamaLlon

CuCP And l'll be rlghL back l've goL a couple blog enLrles l need Lo pull Pold on

Ckay

WCW 1hls ls blg news yes?

Well probably noL lf you're a blogger LhaL has wrlLLen a posL Lrashlng a company you're probably safe lL's
noL llkely LhaL you'll be charged wlLh defamaLlon [usL because you wroLe a ranL on your blog abouL Lhe shlLLy
cusLomer servlce you goL from your cell phone company (ahem) 1he blogger ln Lhe case CrysLal Cox clalmed
Lo be an lnvesLlgaLlve blogger" and had several slLes up LhaL all Lrashed a slngle company Cbsldlan llnance
Croup (one slLe belonglng Lo Ms Cox was called CbsldlanllnanceSuckscom) Whlle aL leasL one blog posL had
some facLs LhaL were apparenLly fed Lo her by an lnslde source (accordlng Lo Lhls Mashable posL) generally Lhe
posLs seem Lo be somewhaL erraLlc and obsesslve (Lhls ls my compleLely unprofesslonal assessmenL for Lhe
record)

1hls posL aL Lhe SeaLLle Weekly 8logs acLually breaks down some of Lhe lssues wlLh Lhe Cregon law as lL sLands
lf you're lnLeresLed Medla shleld laws vary sLaLe by sLaLe (apparenLly lf Ms Cox had been ln WashlngLon
SLaLe Lhe laws would have proLecLed her) and lL's noL enLlrely unllkely LhaL Ms Cox's case wlll be overLurned
on appeal ln facL lf she acLually hlres a lawyer lnsLead of represenLlng herself (as she dld ln Lhls case) she
mlghL also sLand a beLLer chance of success

uoes Lhls case lmpacL Lhe average blogger parLlcularly bloggers LhaL cover corporaLe shenanlgans? lL's a
compllcaLed quesLlon and lL's hard Lo say lf Lhls case wlll sLand 8uL lL's probably safe aL Lhls polnL Lo assume
LhaL bloggers don'L necessarlly have free relgn Lo creaLe webslLes LhaL focus speclflcally on Lrashlng one
parLlcular person organlzaLlon or corporaLlon
LasLly no maLLer whaL you wrlLe as long as lL's clear LhaL lL's sLrlcLly your ClnlCn and noL cold hard facLs
Lhen you are safe AL leasL for now ln Lhls counLry we are all sLlll free Lo sLaLe our oplnlons no maLLer how
lnsane and unaLLracLlve Lhey are

So resL easy for now bloggers 8uL keep your eye on cases llke Lhese

l read Lhe Mashable posL abouL Lhls case and Lhey seemed Loo focused on Lhe are bloggers [ournallsLs?"
angle l'm a blogger happy ro say l'm noL a [ournallsL 8uL l do conslder myself a member of Lhe medla [usL noL
LradlLlonal medla

Powever

WhaL Lhls woman wroLe was noL lnvesLlgaLlve [ournallsm lL was defamaLlon lf she goL her facLs from her
lnslde source" and posLed a facLual accounL of whaL Lhls company/CLC had done wrong Lhls would be a
dlfferenL sLory lnsLead she wenL and called Lhe CLC a llar and a Lhlef and all sorLs of oLher sub[ecLlve crap
and Lhen Lrled Lo hlde behlnd Lhe [ournallsLlc medla shleld

lL doesn'L work LhaL way lf you wanL Lo ouL" someone who ls dolng someLhlng lllegal or lmmoral you sLlck Lo
Lhe facLs ?ou don'L casL [udgmenL or oLherwlse edlLorlallze on someLhlng llke Lhls lacLs are lndlspuLable
because lf Lhey are accuraLe and Lhe accused Lrles Lo come afLer you for llbel lnformaLlon can be subpoenaed
Lo prove you aren'L maklng sLuff up SLarL name calllng and casLlng asperslons Lhough and you're up a creek
for defamaLlon

1 She was noL llnLu for blogglng She losL Lhe case and Lhe damages were awarded Lo Lhe plalnLlff
2 She was noL sued for blogglng She was sued for posLlng defamaLory accusaLlons aL a company wlLhouL
belng facLual or clLlng unblased sources Lo supporL her ClnlCnS
3 She dld noL lose her case because CMC Lhe world haLes bloggers!!! She losL because she can noL prove
ln courL legally LhaL she CuALlllLS for Lhe proLecLlons afforded by Lhe Medla Shleld Law
4 !udge Pernadez declded LhaL Lhe blogger dld noL quallfy as a [ournallsL based ln parL on Lhe followlng 8uL
Pernandez once agaln ruled LhaL Cox was noL a [ournallsL Pe noLed Lhe lack of (1) any educaLlon ln
[ournallsm (2) any credenLlals or proof of any afflllaLlon wlLh any recognlzed news enLlLy (3) proof of
adherence Lo [ournallsLlc sLandards such as edlLlng facLchecklng or dlsclosures of confllcLs of lnLeresL (4)
keeplng noLes of conversaLlons and lnLervlews conducLed (3) muLual undersLandlng or agreemenL of
confldenLlallLy beLween Lhe defendanL and hls/her sources (6) creaLlon of an lndependenL producL raLher Lhan
assembllng wrlLlngs and posLlngs of oLhers or (7) conLacLlng 'Lhe oLher slde' Lo geL boLh sldes of a sLory"
hLLp//arsLechnlcacom/Lechpollcy/news/2011/12/[udgebloggernoLellglblefororegonmedlashleldlawars
3 Ms Cox ls clalmlng LhaL her blogs fall under Lhe [ournallsLlc proLecLlons agalnsL defamaLlon because she PAS
facLual evldence Lo back up her clalms vla secreL sources" who do noL wlsh Lo be revealed llne Can'L have lL
boLh ways Lho lf your allegaLlons can be proven by lnslde sources you need Lo be able Lo Cl1L Lhose lnslde
sources and Lhelr facLs CLherwlse? ?ou can'L publlsh sald allegaLlons
6 1PlS aln'L helplng prove ouL any l'm a !Cu8nALlS1 defence 1he clalm LhaL Cox lsn'L a [ournallsL ls made
plauslble by an emall uncovered by kashmlr Plll aL lorbes (ulsclosure l'm also a blogger aL lorbes)
adrlck supplled Plll wlLh a copy of an emall Cox had senL Lo Cbsldlan llnance a few days afLer Lhe defamaLlon
lawsulL was flled lL offered Cbsldlan 8 Servlces and Search Lnglne ManagemenL Servlces sLarLlng aL $2300 a
monLh" Lo proLecL onllne repuLaLlons" Whlle she doesn'L say so expllclLly Lhe lmpllcaLlon seems Lo be LhaL lf
Cbsldlan forks over some cash Cox wlll make slLes llke obsldlanflnancesuckscom" go away " (same source as
above quoLe)
7 Cf course she losL Lhe case she's acLlng as her own lawyerwhlchcome onserlously ? ?ou have no
credenLlals as a lawyer and are Lrylng Lo prove LhaL even Lho you have no legally accepLable credenLlals as a
[ournallsL you are enLlLled Lo Lhe professlons proLecLlons ?

8eporL Soclal Medla Challenglng 1radlLlonal Medla

8y 8lchard MacManus / Aprll 28 2008 123 M / 7 CommenLs

unlversal McCann has released a new reporL on Lhe lmpacL of soclal medla (such as blogs soclal neLworks
onllne vldeo) on Lhe medla landscape lL surveyed 17000 lnLerneL users worldwlde ln March 2008 1he reporL
found LhaL soclal medla ln parLlcular blogs are becomlng a more lmporLanL parL of global medla consumpLlon
for lnLerneL users Lhan some LradlLlonal medla channels 1he reporL also found LhaL soclal medla ls a global
phenomenon (29 counLrles were surveyed) alLhough Lhere are culLural dlfferences ln how people use lL

1he reporL sLaLes LhaL vldeo cllps blogs podcasLs soclal neLworks and 8SS are all essenLlal componenLs of Lhe
onllne medla dleL Pere are some of Lhe key flndlngs

83 waLch vldeo cllps up from 62 ln Lhe lasL sLudy ln !une 2007
78 read blogs up from 66
37 of lnLerneL users are now members of a soclal neLwork
8SS consumpLlon ls growlng rapldly up from 13 Lo 39
odcasLs are now malnsLream dlglLal conLenL llsLened Lo by 48

Soclal neLworks have been a key drlver for Lhe growLh of soclal medla

22 of soclal neLwork users have lnsLalled a wldgeL or appllcaLlons
33 have shared phoLos
22 have shared Lhelr vldeos
31 have sLarLed a blog
1he world's blggesL soclal neLwork ls MySpace wlLh 32 weekly reach followed by lacebook on 23

1he reporL also sLaLes LhaL soclal medla ls a global phenomenon

1op markeLs for blogglng Chlna 70 of lnLerneL users wrlLe a blog hlllpplnes 66 and Mexlco 60
1op markeLs for soclal neLworklng hlllpplnes 83 Pungary 76 and oland 76
Chlna ls Lhe worlds largesL blogglng markeL wlLh 42m bloggers versus 26m ln Lhe uS

1hose lasL sLaLs wlll be an eye opener for many because Lhe uS web Lech markeL geLs mosL of Lhe aLLenLlon of
Lhe blogosphere and malnsLream medla 8uL wlLh Chlna havlng 42m bloggers compared Lo Lhe uSs 26m Lhere
ls large scope for soclal medla Lo flourlsh Lhere even desplLe Chlnas pollLlcal lssues wlLh soclal medla

Social Media

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Social Media

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1uesday !

une 23 2009uefamaLlon and Soclal Medla

You might also like