Defamation Question

RATM

In the last while any cases of defamation I can think of in the media have resulted in the media organisation getting sued, not the individual who wrote/stated the defamatory comments. For example Mary Harney, after been accused by Nell McCafferty of being an alcoholic on Newstalk subsequently went and took action against Newstalk, not against McCafferty.

Can anyone explain why is this? Is it because Newstalk are more likely to have €€€ at their disposal ? Or is there a legal reason in the Defamation Act?

And to play devils advocate- if, for example, the defaming conversation took place on a US radio station with an Irish person ringing in from Ireland- would that Irish person be then giving protection under Freedom of Speech laws in the US as the broadcaster is US based? Or would it still be possible to take an action against the individual irrespective of where the broadcaster was based?

Saruman

Well a writer for a newspaper can not just write whatever they want. Every word is checked by an editor and approved.

There is another reason which is far more complicated to type out now but an example is, if you are a passenger on a bus and it is involved in an accident and you get injured, there is no point suing the driver. You sue Dublin Bus or whoever as they are the ones insured.

Flincher

I've worked on a couple of cases which have issued since the new Act came in, and Counsel drafted papers to include the paper, the editor, and the journalist as co-defendants. Generally, the paper/media organisation would indemnify their employees, and in the cases I can remember the papers' solicitor has acted on behalf of the journalist and editor.