Tweeting Woes

One of my employees tweeted something about the accounting policies of a major company that, while light-hearted, could have been construed as libelous. The employee has been dealt with appropriately, but I am worried about how to avoid such situations arising again.

As Sally Bercow recently found to her cost, the intended meaning of a tweet is immaterial. The law looks at the ordinary meaning of the words or any innuendo, meaning that they carry as a result of the surrounding factual circumstances.

Furthermore, although a tweet is only short, the impact of what is said can be just as significant as a well-prepared article, without the thought and preparation that would go into an article.

A company that engages in social media must apply the same checks to what it publishes as to any other communication. The level of damages awarded in respect of a tweet are at the same level as any form of publication and can be greater, given how widely they can be retweeted.

It is inappropriate to allow any member of staff to tweet on behalf of the company. There should be a policy that tweets only come from one source, even if others help to prepare them.

That source should be a senior person who has the requisite knowledge of defamation, confidentiality and privacy law to ensure that the tweets do not fall foul of them.