INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section states that a person is not liable for publishing a defamatory libel if they publish a fair and accurate report of proceedings at a public meeting, and the publication is for the public benefit, and they provide an opportunity for the person defamed to respond.
SECTION WORDING
308 No person shall be deemed to publish a defamatory libel by reason only that he publishes in good faith, in a newspaper, a fair report of the proceedings of any public meeting if (a) the meeting is lawfully convened for a lawful purpose and is open to the public; (b) the report is fair and accurate; (c) the publication of the matter complained of is for the public benefit; and (d) he does not refuse to publish in a conspicuous place in the newspaper a reasonable explanation or contradiction by the person defamed in respect of the defamatory matter.
EXPLANATION
Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a defense against a charge of defamatory libel for individuals who publish a fair report of the proceedings of a public meeting in good faith. The section outlines four conditions that must be met to qualify for this defense. Firstly, the meeting must have been lawfully convened for a lawful purpose and open to the public. This emphasizes the importance of transparency and accountability in public affairs, as information discussed in private meetings may not be protected under this defense. Secondly, the report must be fair and accurate, meaning that it must not misrepresent or exaggerate the proceedings of the meeting. This requirement ensures that accurate information is being disseminated to the public. Thirdly, the publication of the matter must be for the public benefit. This means that the report must be of public interest and importance, rather than solely for personal gain or entertainment. Lastly, if the person defamed requests a reasonable explanation or contradiction to be published in a conspicuous place in the newspaper, the individual publishing the report must comply. This provides an opportunity for the person accused of defamatory libel to defend themselves. Overall, Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada recognizes the importance of freedom of the press and the dissemination of information in the public interest, while also striving to balance the protection of an individual's reputation.
COMMENTARY
Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides some degree of protection to media outlets and journalists when reporting on public meetings. This section stipulates that a person cannot be deemed to publish a defamatory libel solely by reason of publishing a fair report of the proceedings of a public meeting, provided that certain conditions are met. The conditions that must be met for the publisher to be protected include the fact that the meeting must be lawfully convened for a lawful purpose and must be open to the public. This means that the meeting must be held within the confines of the law and must not be conducted in a clandestine or secretive manner. The requirement that the meeting be open to the public ensures that the reporting is conducted in a transparent manner, allowing anyone who is interested to attend and observe the proceedings. The report that is published must also be fair and accurate. This means that any opinions or statements that are included in the report should be presented in a way that is truthful and fair. Journalists should strive to ensure that their reports are accurate and reflective of the events that occurred during the public meeting. This is particularly important in light of the rise of so-called "fake news", where journalists publish inaccurate stories in an effort to push a particular narrative. The publication of the matter complained about must be for the public benefit. This means that the reporting must have some sort of merit or positive benefit to society at large. This could include informing the public about important issues or events that could have an impact on their lives. It is important to note that this condition does not provide blanket protection for all reporting, but instead requires a balancing of interests between the public's right to be informed and the potential harm caused to any individual who may feel defamed by the report. Finally, if an individual feels that they have been defamed by the report, the publisher must provide a reasonable explanation or contradiction in a conspicuous place in the newspaper. This requirement ensures that any individual who is defamed by the report has the opportunity to respond and set the record straight. Overall, Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada strikes a balance between the important role that journalism plays in informing the public and the need to protect individuals from false and defamatory reporting. While the law does provide some degree of protection to journalists, it does so within a framework that considers the rights and interests of all parties involved. This ensures that journalists can continue to do their jobs while also upholding the principles of fairness, accuracy, and accountability.
STRATEGY
Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a key provision that journalists and media outlets rely upon to avoid defamation claims when reporting on public meetings. However, as with any legal provision, there are strategic considerations that parties should keep in mind when dealing with this section. Below, we'll explore some of these considerations and strategies. First, it's important to note that Section 308 is not a blanket protection against defamation. Rather, it provides a defense to a defamation claim in certain specific circumstances. As such, media outlets should be mindful of the elements of the provision and ensure that their reporting fits within its parameters. One key consideration is the requirement that the meeting be lawfully convened for a lawful purpose and be open to the public. This means that if the meeting is held in violation of any laws or regulations, or if it is a closed-door, private meeting, Section 308 will not protect media outlets from defamation claims. As such, it's important for journalists to ensure that they are attending and reporting on meetings that meet these criteria. Next, the report of the proceeding must be fair and accurate. This means that media outlets must ensure that they are reporting the facts as accurately as possible and that they are not editorializing or inserting their own opinions or biases into the report. In addition, media outlets should ensure that they are not selectively quoting individuals or taking statements out of context, as this can lead to claims of inaccuracy or unfairness. Another key consideration is the requirement that the publication of the matter complained of be for the public benefit. This means that media outlets should be mindful of the public interest when deciding what to report on. While the definition of "public benefit" can be nebulous, reporters should endeavor to report on issues that impact the broader community and that are of interest to the public at large. Finally, Section 308 requires that media outlets provide the person who has been defamed with a reasonable explanation or contradiction in a conspicuous place in the newspaper. This requirement is important because it allows the person who has been defamed to have an opportunity to respond and correct any inaccuracies. Media outlets should ensure that they are adhering to this requirement and that they are providing the person with a meaningful opportunity to respond. Given these considerations, there are several strategies that media outlets can employ when dealing with Section 308. For example: - Develop internal protocols and guidelines for reporting on public meetings. These guidelines can help ensure that reporters are attending meetings that meet the criteria set out in Section 308, that they are reporting accurately and fairly, and that they are considering the public interest. - Provide training to reporters on how to report on public meetings. This can include training on how to take accurate notes, how to ask questions to clarify information, and how to report in a way that is fair and unbiased. - Be transparent about the reporting process. Media outlets can help mitigate claims of bias or inaccuracy by being transparent about the steps they take to ensure fair and accurate reporting. For example, they can explain how they verify information, how they select quotes to include in their reports, and how they decide which aspects of a meeting to report on. - Engage with the person who has been defamed. If a media outlet receives a complaint from someone who has been defamed, they should engage with that person in a respectful and meaningful way. This can involve providing an opportunity for the person to respond in a letter to the editor or offering to publish a correction or clarification. Overall, Section 308 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that journalists and media outlets should be aware of when reporting on public meetings. By understanding the elements of the provision and implementing strategic considerations and strategies, media outlets can help ensure that their reporting is accurate, fair, and in the public interest.