Defamation cases can be complex, as the extent of the damage to the plaintiff's reputation is not always easily quantifiable.
One concept that often arises in these cases is the 'grapevine effect', which acknowledges the potential for defamatory material to spread beyond its original publication through various channels, leading to potentially far-reaching consequences.
In this blog post, I explore the grapevine effect in defamation cases, with a focus on how it can impact damage assessments and the role of social media in its proliferation.
The Grapevine Effect in Defamation
In the case of Brose v Baluskas & Ors (No 6) [2020] QDC 15, the court explained the grapevine effect as "the realistic recognition by the law that, by the ordinary function of human nature, the dissemination of defamatory material is rarely confined to those to whom the matter is immediately published" (Wagner, 269).
This effect can have a significant impact on the plaintiff's reputation, even if the original publication reached a relatively small audience.
The Grapevine Effect and Social Media
The proliferation of social media has made it even easier for defamatory material to spread through the grapevine effect. With just a few clicks or taps on a mobile device, users can share posts that contain defamatory content, potentially reaching a much wider audience than the original publication.
However, it is important to note that the grapevine effect does not automatically arise in all cases involving social media. As noted in Mickle v Farley [2013] NSWDC 295, there must be some evidentiary basis pointing to the grapevine effect's existence before it can be taken into account for the assessment of damages.
Determining the Grapevine Effect's Impact
Assessing the grapevine effect's impact on damages can be challenging, as it is often difficult to determine the true extent of the defamatory material's dissemination. Courts must consider both the initial publication and any subsequent republications or media coverage to gauge the extent of the plaintiff's reputation damage.
In some cases, as seen in Brose v Baluskas & Ors (No 6), the media coverage of defamation proceedings can contribute to the grapevine effect, potentially exacerbating the plaintiff's reputational harm.
In assessing damages, courts also need to consider the need for vindication of the plaintiff's reputation. The sum awarded for vindication must be "at least the minimum necessary to signal to the public the vindication of the [plaintiff’s] reputation and sufficient to convince a person to whom the publication was made or to whom it has spread along the grapevine of 'the baselessness of the charge'" (Brose v Baluskas & Ors (No 6), [457]).
Key Take-Aways
The grapevine effect is an important factor to consider in defamation cases, as it can significantly impact the extent of damage to the plaintiff's reputation.
With the rise of social media, the grapevine effect has become even more potent, making it crucial for courts to carefully assess its role in each case.