Slander and libel are both types of defamation. Both involve false statements made that cause injury to the target/victim of the statements. Slander is legally defined as SPOKEN words of defamation; that is, oral defamation. By contrast, Libel is legally defined as WRITTEN words of defamation — that is, false statements made in writing.

One key difference between the two is with respect to ease of proof. Slander — being oral statements — can, sometimes, be difficult to prove since the exact words may not be correctly remembered. Of course, if the oral false statements are recorded or broadcast, then there can be no difficulty in the proof. Since libel is in writing, then there is no particular difficulty in proving the exact words that were written.

The exact words are an important aspect of the proof since small differences in what was said or written can have a large impact on legal liability. For example, a statement that is considered an opinion is generally not defamation — either slander or libel. The exact wording used will often make a difference in whether the statement can be seen as an opinion or an actionable false statement of fact. As a quick example, consider the difference between “I think he is a crook” versus “He is a crook.” The first might be an opinion; the other is a statement of fact. Generally, statements of fact are subject to proof or disproof, while an opinion is, well, an opinion.

If a person or business has been the victim of libel or slander, they can file a civil lawsuit in state or federal court.

There are two purposes for suing if you have been the victim of libel and/or slander. The first purpose is to obtain monetary damages for the injury caused by the false statement (or statements). The injury may be reputational, emotional, or quantifiable economic to a business or business relationship. If, for example, you are a social media influencer with several promotional contracts with businesses, and if you lose any of those promotional contracts because of libel or defamation, you can sue for the economic losses due to those canceled promotional contracts. Likewise, if a business is libeled or slandered, and the libel/slander causes a loss of sales, then the business can sue for lost profits and other associated economic damages.

The second purpose is to punish the person/business engaging in slander or libel and to deter others from engaging in similar reprehensible behavior. This is done by seeking punitive damages, which is available for libel and/or slander in many cases. Being legally liable for libel and/or slander often requires proof that the person making the false statements did so with intent. Put legally, libel and slander are intentional torts. As such, if the facts are sufficiently egregious, then punitive damages can be awarded. Punitive damages are not compensation; rather, they are punishment. The punishment is also directed at others in the sense that others will see the punishment and be deterred from engaging in similar types of libel and slander.

Contact the Libel and Slander Defense Attorneys at Revision Legal For more information, contact the experienced Libel and Slander Defense Lawyers at Revision Legal. You can contact us through the form on this page or call (855) 473-8474.

Defamation Law: The Elements of Slander and Libel and How to Prove Your Case

Defamation — encompassing both slander and libel — is an area of law that arises frequently in the internet age, where damaging false statements can spread instantly and reach audiences of millions. Whether you are a business that has been the target of a competitor’s false statements, an individual whose reputation has been damaged by online posts, or a professional navigating a complaint campaign, understanding the legal elements of defamation and how the law distinguishes between actionable statements and protected speech is essential before deciding whether to pursue legal action.

The Legal Elements of a Defamation Claim

Defamation law is primarily governed by state common law and state statutes, but it is bounded by First Amendment protections as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The elements of a defamation claim vary somewhat by state, but the general framework requires the plaintiff to establish:

• A false statement of fact — the statement must be false, and it must assert fact (not opinion); truth is an absolute defense to defamation
• Publication — the statement must have been communicated to at least one person other than the plaintiff; for libel, “publication” includes posting online, sending an email to third parties, or printing and distributing
• Identification of the plaintiff — the statement must be “of and concerning” the plaintiff; the plaintiff need not be named by name if the statement is reasonably understood to refer to them
• Fault — the level of fault required depends on whether the plaintiff is a public or private figure (discussed below)
• Damages — for some categories of defamation, damages are presumed from the statement itself (defamation per se); for others, the plaintiff must prove actual harm

Public Figures vs. Private Individuals: Different Legal Standards

The Supreme Court’s decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), established that public officials — and, by extension, public figures — must meet a heightened standard to prevail in a defamation action. A public figure must prove “actual malice” — that the defendant made the false statement knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for whether it was true or false. This is a demanding standard specifically designed to protect robust public debate.

Private individuals — those who have not voluntarily thrust themselves into public controversy — need only prove that the defendant was negligent in making the false statement. The Supreme Court in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974), gave states the authority to set their own fault standards for private figure plaintiffs, requiring at minimum negligence. Many states apply the negligence standard, which asks whether a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known the statement was false or would have investigated before making it.

The distinction between public figures and private individuals is frequently contested in litigation. A local business owner, a social media influencer with a substantial following, or a professional who has received significant media attention may be treated as a limited-purpose public figure on topics within the scope of their public role. The analysis is fact-specific and can significantly affect the viability of a defamation claim.

Defamation Per Se: When Damages Are Presumed

Some categories of defamatory statements are considered so inherently damaging that damages are presumed without specific proof of harm. These “defamation per se” categories typically include:

• False statements that the plaintiff has committed a crime
• False statements about the plaintiff’s profession, trade, or business that damage their professional reputation
• False statements that the plaintiff has a loathsome disease (historically this applied to sexually transmitted diseases)
• False statements of a sexual nature about the plaintiff

The practical significance of defamation per se is that the plaintiff does not need to quantify or prove specific monetary losses. The jury can award general damages based on the nature of the statement alone. For businesses, false statements that a company’s products are defective, fraudulent, or illegal, or that the business engaged in financial fraud, can often qualify as defamation per se affecting commercial reputation.

Online Defamation and Section 230 Immunity

The rise of internet platforms has introduced a complicating factor in defamation litigation: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230. Under § 230(c)(1), “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” This provision immunizes social media platforms, review sites, and online forums from defamation liability for content posted by third-party users.

Section 230 immunity means that you generally cannot sue Facebook, Yelp, or Reddit for hosting defamatory content posted by a user. You must identify and sue the original poster. This requires either knowing who the poster is or pursuing subpoenas to compel the platform to disclose the poster’s identity — a process that can be complex and requires meeting legal thresholds before a court will order disclosure. An experienced defamation attorney can evaluate the feasibility of unmasking anonymous online defamers and pursuing them directly.

Business Defamation and Trade Libel

Businesses are frequently targets of defamatory statements from competitors, disgruntled former customers, and bad-faith actors. When the false statements specifically concern the quality or characteristics of a business’s products or services — rather than the business or its owners as such — the appropriate claim may be “trade libel” or “product disparagement” rather than standard defamation. Trade libel requires proof of actual malice (knowing falsity or reckless disregard) and actual economic damages, making it a higher bar than standard libel for private individuals. However, when the false statements meet that standard, the available remedies include injunctive relief to stop further publication and monetary damages including lost profits.

The defamation attorneys at Revision Legal represent both plaintiffs pursuing defamation claims and defendants defending against unfounded accusations. We handle online defamation, business disparagement, review fraud, and other reputational harm matters. If you or your business has been damaged by false statements, contact us to evaluate your legal options.