Osgoode Hall Law Journal Article 6 Volume 48, Number 3/4 (Fall/Winter 2010) Chasing Reputation: The Argument for Differential Treatment of Public Figures in Canadian Defamation Law Bob Tarantino Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Torts Commons Article Citation Information Tarantino, Bob. "Chasing Reputation: The Argument for Differential Treatment of Public Figures in Canadian Defamation Law." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 48.3/4 (2010) : 595-638. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol48/iss3/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Chasing Reputation: The Argument for Differential Treatment of Public Figures in Canadian Defamation Law Abstract When comparing the seminal Supreme Court of Canada defamation decisions of the 1990s and 2000s, it is apparent that the Court's view on the importance of protecting reputation has changed. Recent decisions hail the importance of using freedom of expression as a countervailing interest against the oft-criticized strictures of the common law of defamation. Fundamental alterations in the nature of mass and interactive media and in the nature of reputation are two phenomena informing this change. Increased attention to the theorizing of "reputation," the interest whose protection animates the entire tort of defamation, reveals that reputation is itself a highly constructed, contextual, and malleable artifact. This article proposes recasting the tort of defamation into two different tracks: one for public figures, who pose the highest risk of abusing the tort, and one for private plaintiffs, whose reputational interest is akin to traditional notions of reputation. Keywords Libel and slander; Reputation (Law); Canada This article is available in Osgoode Hall Law Journal: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol48/iss3/6 595 Chasing Reputation: The Argument for Differential Treatment of "Public Figures" in Canadian Defamation Law BOB TARANTINO* When comparing the seminal Supreme Court of Canada defamation decisions of the 1990s and 2000s, it is apparent that the Court's view on the importance of protecting reputation has changed. Recent decisions hail the importance of using freedom of expression as a countervailing interest against the oft-criticized strictures of the common law of defamation. Fundamental alterations in the nature of mass and interactive media and in the nature of reputation are two phenomena informing this change. Increased attention to the theorizing of "reputation, the interest whose protection animates the entire tort of defamation, reveals that reputation is itself a highly constructed, contextual, and malleable artifact. This article proposes recasting the tort of defamation into two different tracks: one for public figures, who pose the highest risk of abusing the tort, and one for private plaintiffs, whose reputational interest is akin to traditional notions of reputation. Lorsque Ion compare les arritis annonciateurs en matiere de diffamation, que Ia Cour Supreme du Canada a rendus dans Les annees 1990 et 2000, on voit U'volution du point de vue de Ia Cour sur limportance de prot6ger Ia reputation. Les arr&tes r6cents saluent L'importance de recourir a Ia libert6 d'expression en tant qu'int6rat compensateur des retrecissements - souvent critiqu6s - que comporte Ia common lawen matibre de diffama- tion. Des alterations fondamentales de La nature des mass-m6dias et des m6dias interactifs, ainsi que de Ia nature mime de Ia r6putation, constituent deux ph~nomenes qui dessinent ce changement. Une attention accrue sur [a th6orisation de La<< r6putation, > interit dont Ia protection meut LedMtit entier de Ladiffamation, r6vele que Ia rdputation est en eLte-mime une creation extrimement etabor6e, contextuelle et malleable. Cet article propose de rediriger le delit de diffamation sur deux voies differentes : tune pour les personnalit6s publiques, qui pr6sentent le plus grand risque d'abuser de ce delit; lautre pour Les plaignants priv6s, dont Uint6rit pour leur rdputation est conforme aux notions traditionnelles de Ia r6putation. LL.B., LL.M. (Osgoode Hall), B.C.L. (Oxon.). Lawyer, Entertainment Law Group, Heenan Blaikie LLP. An earlier version of this article was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Oxford B.C.L. degree. The author thanks Laura Hoyano for her prudent advice and suggestions on that earlier version. Sole responsibility for any errors remains, of course, with the author. 596 12010148 OSGOODE HALL LAW JOURNAL 1. REPUTATION IN CANADIAN DEFAMATION LAW AFTER HILL AND LUCAS................................... 599 II. REPUTATION IN CANADIAN DEFAMATION LAW AFTER WIC RADIO. CUSSON, AND GRANT.......603 A. W IC R adio ......................................................................................................................... 603 B. Cusson and Grant............................................................................................................. 607 Ill. TH E CO N CEPT OF REPUTATION .................................................................................................... 611 IV. A DEFAMATION TORT FOR PUBLIC FIGURES................................................................................ 621 A . Intro d u ctio n ...................................................................................................................... 6 2 1 B. Pro po sal...........................................................................................................................62 6 1. P ublic Figu re P laintiffs ...................................................................................... 628 2. Damages Limited to Provable Actual Damages and Punitive Damages........... 630 3. Declaration of Falsity......................................................................................... 63 1 4. Order to Publish Correction ............................................................................. 632 V. POTEN T IAL C R ITIC ISM S ................................................................................................................ 634 A . The Search for Truth ....................................................................................................... 634 B. Vagaries of a 'Public Figure Test .................................................................................. 635 C. S u llivan .............................................................. ............................................................ 63 6 D. F ra ctu re ....................................................................................... ................................... 637 V I. CO N C L US ION ................................................................................................................................. 637 IN THE FIRST FIFTEEN YEARS since the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) described the protection of an individual's reputation as something that is "of vital importance ... [and that] reflects the innate dignity of the individual, a concept which underlies all the [Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'] rights," 2 Canadian courts, including the SCC itself, have dramatically shifted the fulcrum of defamation law away from protecting reputation in favour of freedom of expression. Whereas seminal SCC decisions on Canadian defamation law from the 1990s, such as Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto' and R. v. Lucas,4 expound in detail the doctrinal imperative of protecting an individual's reputation, recent appellate decisions devote comparatively little attention to its importance. Instead, these appellate decisions emphasize the need to modify defamation law so as to accord a broader ambit to the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of the media. 1. Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the CanadaAct 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c.1i [Charter]. 2. Hill v. Church ofScientology of Toronto, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1130 at paras. 117-20 [Hill]. 3. Ibid. 4. [1998] 1 S.C.R. 439 [Lucas]. TARANTINO, CHASING REPUTATION 597 This article explores the causes and implications of the decline of protecting reputation as the focal point of Canadian defamation law. In short, the nature of "reputation," and, hence, the nature of the interest that the tort of defamation strives to protect, has changed in light of the development and spread of mass and interactive communications technology. That nature has changed most drastically for certain members of society who can be referred to as "public figures." In light of that alteration of the underlying interest being protected, a corresponding change in the mechanism that is used to protect it is needed. It will be argued in this article that recent efforts at reforming defamation law are too tentative to accomplish the goals that the reformers assert they wish to achieve; if we are to take seriously the implications of the underlying motivations for the doctrinal shifts we have seen, then a more radical restructuring of Cana- dian defamation law is required. A welcome development in some recent decisions is a movement away from describing the task of the courts as balancing reputation and expression, in preference to describing the undertaking as one of reconciling the competing interestss-with reputation cast as the junior stakeholder. The privileging of expression over reputation can be profitably