This One Is Beyond Libelous

[Our House]

NJ Bans E-Cigarette Use in Public // Joins VA, Suffolk County, Others, in Growing Movement

"The New Jersey Senate just passed the bill 38-0, after it was unanimously adopted by the Assembly. The Governor is expected to sign it. A number of other jurisdictions are considering similar measures in a reaction to the growing use of e-cigs -- where users blow large clouds of nicotine, propylene glycol, and smaller amounts of various toxins and carcinogens-- in no-smoking sections where nonsmokers expect protection from pretend smokers as well as real ones, says Banz***.

ASH's detailed report in support of the bill pointed out that bystanders are forced in inhale large amounts of nicotine (a highly addictive and deadly drug which can trigger heart attacks), and propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections)."

WTF??

The nutjob has finally crossed over the line. Can someone (legally) be held accountable for making defamatory remarks against a group, or does it only apply to individual companies? Because he's trying his hardest to do it.

 

[Darmeen]

Does anyone actually have statistics on nicotine alone...everything that I can find is about nicotine in a cigarette...and we know how many other chemicals are there that might be skewing these facts atributed to nicotine alone.

I would love to read something about just nicotine, if such a thing exists.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

He can spew all the jurismydiktion he wants as big pharma has him in their pocket. I'd just love to see someone sue the ash out of this guy. A first class knob.

 

[breakfastchef]

The political machine, media coverage and the social disdain with anything smoking leads to a mob mentality of misguided decisions. With that said, vapers have very little solid scientific evidence that second-hand vapor is relatively safe. Sure, sucking on a tailpipe of an automobile that is running is likely pretty bad for your health. But, until the manufacturers of our devices step up to the plate, we have little to stand on that is solid. Obscure reports from NZ or a Chinese e-liquid manufacturer will not 'hold water' with public opinion or government agencies.

 

[Ionredline]

I'm just curious what ambulance he will chance after/if e-cigs get banned.Maybe he'll push to ban Big Macs or he'll push to ban cars, we all know how bad car emissions are for our lungs.Then we can all drive a Prius and skip through green fields in a perfect utopian society.Nothing pisses me off more than some tool telling me what is good for me.

 

[Dillan]

Fight smarter, not angrier. The statement made here almost certainly isn't "bad enough" to be sued over. There's no specific person identified, just a group (compare to someone spouting, say, racist propoganda), and the statement said is at least a reasonable conclusion made by a person who did a cursory investigation. Therefore it doesn't rise to the level of "reckless disregard of the truth." (people don't have to become experts to spout their heads off), even if the "group" problem wasn't there.

 

[CJsKee]

Michael Seigel talks about this in his blog today...
The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
Check out the comments, too. The former Winston man talks about a lawsuit!

 

[Our House]

Fight smarter, not angrier. The statement made here almost certainly isn't "bad enough" to be sued over. There's no specific person identified, just a group (compare to someone spouting, say, racist propoganda), and the statement said is at least a reasonable conclusion made by a person who did a cursory investigation. Therefore it doesn't rise to the level of "reckless disregard of the truth." (people don't have to become experts to spout their heads off), even if the "group" problem wasn't there.

If I constantly release PR articles making baseless claims that Sony plasma TVs emit large amounts of highly toxic ingredients known to cause cancer and other contaminants that have long term negative effects on childrens' eyesight and livers, you bet your ... Sony is going to sue me.

Now, what happens if I do the same thing but say "all plasma TVs" instead of just Sony's? Can Sony, Toshiba, Sharp, etc all get together and sue me for degradation?

 

[TropicalBob]

No, it's not libelous. It's untrue, but that doesn't raise a story or accusation to the libel standard.

But Siegel did a good job of tearing apart this idiot's far-fetched claims of heart attacks, etc. We can count Siegel, Bill Godshall and Elizabeth Whelen as just about our only friends with power.

 

[JerryRM]

NJ Bans E-Cigarette Use in Public // Joins VA, Suffolk County, Others, in Growing Movement

"The New Jersey Senate just passed the bill 38-0, after it was unanimously adopted by the Assembly. The Governor is expected to sign it. A number of other jurisdictions are considering similar measures in a reaction to the growing use of e-cigs -- where users blow large clouds of nicotine, propylene glycol, and smaller amounts of various toxins and carcinogens-- in no-smoking sections where nonsmokers expect protection from pretend smokers as well as real ones, says Banz***.

ASH's detailed report in support of the bill pointed out that bystanders are forced in inhale large amounts of nicotine (a highly addictive and deadly drug which can trigger heart attacks), and propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections)."

WTF??

The nutjob has finally crossed over the line. Can someone (legally) be held accountable for making defamatory remarks against a group, or does it only apply to individual companies? Because he's trying his hardest to do it.

He was quiet for a while and now he is back to attacking e-cigs. It's obvious that he doesn't know much, if anything about them, yet he still rants on.

Since we are using a "pretend cigarette", maybe we should only be restricted from using it, when we are in the presence of pretend people.

 

[BigJimW]

I'm just curious what ambulance he will chance after/if e-cigs get banned.Maybe he'll push to ban Big Macs

John Banzhaf Watch

You're not too far off the mark with that statement.

 

[Our House]

No, it's not libelous.

Neither the Sony nor the Plasma example constitutes libel? Really.

Give me an example of what would be libelous.

 

[Mac]

Neither the Sony nor the Plasma example constitutes libel? Really.

Give me an example of what would be libelous.

Example:

In a related story the ECF forum poster Our House raped 3 under age albino girls and murdered a small tribe of indonesian pygmies. He has signed a full confession and was presumed to be under the influence of several illegal narcotics including ..., milk of magnesia and electronic cigarettes at the time.

Here's tom with the weather.

 

[Our House]

Example:

In a related story the ECF forum poster Our House raped 3 under age albino girls and murdered a small tribe of indonesian pygmies. He has signed a full confession and was presumed to be under the influence of several illegal narcotics including ..., milk of magnesia and electronic cigarettes at the time.

Solution:

Ban ecigs, obv.

 

[Mac]

Solution:

Ban ecigs, obv.

OMG I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I read your reason for editing!

 

[TropicalBob]

Remember that libel is not solely based on untruth. The writer has to know it is untrue, otherwise it's opinion. And the writer has to have "malicious intent" in making the statements. And it cannot be construed by anyone as fiction or opinion, for which anything goes. It's called freedom of speech.

Very, very few libel cases occur anymore. Use the above truths to understand why. First defense: I thought it was true. Second defense: I'm just putting out the warnings, no maliciousness intended.

If you bring a libel charge, you better be able to prove the writer knew the falsehold (how can you get in his mind?) and that he meant his words to cause serious damage.

Libel (written) and slander (spoken) cases are almost historical relics today. Witness the crap spouted daily on talk radio and cable TV. The emergence of the blog is the final hoorah of "anyone goes" untruths masked as free speech under the Second Amendment.

Rant on, brother. Rant on.

 

[exogenesis]

Perhaps we can get him to say that about a UK company's product, whilst he's in the UK.

The burden of proof is on the other party over here (stupidly),
i.e. if you broadcast something derogatory & you're taken to court,
you've got to prove what you said is the truth.
So if you make a claim you got to prove it!

Anyone want to send him an air ticket?

The UK system is a bit daft, since it effectively causing a gagging of a significant amount of
useful counter-research (other fields, not e-cigs), cos people are too scared to challenge existing data,
even if you win it's cost you a fortune in the courts,
even if you can afford to stay the distance.

 

[KonaNeil]

....The UK system is a bit daft, since it effectively causing a gagging of a significant amount of
useful counter-research (other fields, not e-cigs), cos people are too scared to challenge existing data,
even if you win it's cost you a fortune in the courts,
even if you can afford to stay the distance.

Doesn't your country's system stipulate that in litigation, the prevailing party's legal costs be shouldered by the losing party?

In any case, it can be even screwier in some of your neighbor EU countries where damages can be claimed for truthful negative statements made against a business.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

Doesn't your country's system stipulate that in litigation, the prevailing party's legal costs be shouldered by the losing party?

In any case, it can be even screwier in some of your neighbor EU countries where damages can be claimed for truthful negative statements made against a business.

Yeah, well thats the EU for you
It's the whole reason why the UK doesn't want anything to do with an EU superstate. I want nothing to do with that centre-left liberal stuff.

 

[ECGuy]

So what do we do about it? We comment on every single news story, blog entry, website or comment that quotes any of that. Put Siegel's comments and use phrases like:

Professional class action lawsuit and drug company funded anti smoking activist attorney says...."" and Dr. Micheal Siegel, professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health and a well known tobacco control expert and second hand smoke researcher responded "".

My fav quote and one i'll be using a lot is: "The claim being made by ASH is completely unsupported by scientific evidence. There simply is no scientific evidence to support the assertion that secondhand vapor from electronic cigarettes is a cause of heart attacks in nonsmokers."

or

"Not only is the claim unsupported by any evidence, but there is not any existing evidence that several necessary facts asserted by ASH are true."

Don't run around calling Johnny B names, just point out where his argument is flawed and always keep in the forefront that he is a drug company funded attorney, with no medical training or degrees what so ever.

It's time people stopped listening to him, not just on this issue, but on every issue. He's the "expert" without any credentials. Let's help get the word out of the credentialed experts instead.