For the second time this year, a federal court ruled that bloggers and traditional media are on equal footing in libel cases.

A Florida District Court dismissed a libel suit against then-University of Florida student and blogger Matthew Frederick VanVoorhis on Friday because he qualifies as a  “media defendant” under state law. VanVoorhis was being sued by Chris Comins for a blog post that called Comins a “barbarian hillbilly dog-assassin” after he shot a couple of dogs in 2008. While local media also reported on the dog shooting, Comins only went after VanVoorhis.

VanVoorhis was let off the hook because Comins didn’t consider the blog to be part of the media and didn’t give him five days notice for the lawsuit began, which is required under Florida law. Despite the win, pro-blog decision, the court concluded that VanVoorhis is not a reporter in the traditional sense and not all blogs are created equal. According to the court opinion,

It appears clear that many blogs and bloggers will fall within the broad reach of “media” …There are many outstanding blogs on particular topics, managed by persons of exceptional expertise, to whom we look for the most immediate information on recent developments and on whom we look for the most immediate information on recent developments and on whom we rely for informed explanations on the meaning of these developments. … We are not prepared to say that all blogs and all bloggers would qualify for the protection of section 770.01, Florida Statutes. 

This isn’t the first time that bloggers have been afforded traditional media rights while remaining distinctly apart from traditional journalists. In January, blogger Crystal Cox was granted a new trial after being charged with defamation because, according to the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision, “with the advent of the Internet and the decline of print and broadcast media … the line between the media and others who wish to comment on political and social issues becomes far more blurred.”

Credit: Martin Gommel
Credit: Martin Gommel

In Cox’s case, part of the reason for the new trial was because the Ninth Court of Appeals also asserted that any allegations of crime are of public concern and that a blogger cannot be found guilty of libel unless they acted negligently.

There are still some sticking points that bloggers have to deal with. Part of the reason why Comins sued VanVoorhis was because of “death threats … in the blog’s comments section and over the fact that Comins’s personal and business contact information had been posed in the comments section,” according to the court opinion. While not the fault of the post’s writer, doesn’t help a blog’s overall image. Travis Crabtree of eMedia Law Insider explains that

rants are protected by the First Amendment, but threats of imminent harm or immediate calls to illegal actions are not.  … [I]f a reasonable person would believe the speaker has an intent to cause actual harm, then it can become a threat and not mere protected speech.   Moreover, when the target of the threat is a sport figure or politician, it may not be realistic to think the person would actually act it out, but there are enough crazy people out there for law enforcement to take a close look at some of these cases.

While less-than-civil comments on VanVoorhis’ original post still exists,  if a blogger himself is going to be nasty about someone, he should at least back it up. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press recommends that hyperlinking can help avoid a defamation suit.

Suppose a blogger writes, “I think the mayor is a thief.” Even though it begins with “I think” and sounds like an opinion, it is followed by an assertion of fact. Standing alone, that statement could be defamatory. But if the writer provides hyperlinks to accurate accounts on which the conclusion is based, then the statement may be considered “pure opinion” and not defamation.

While blogging isn’t entirely consequence – or lawsuit –  free, both of these rulings are still big wins for bloggers in establishing their foothold in digital media – even if the Florida court counts them as “other medium.”