QED conference talks notes, part five

Brief comments and notes on QEDCON day 2 (Sun 14 Apr 2013)

Talks:

10) Social Media and the Law (Panel discussion with Helen Dale, Ian Rushton, Simon Singh and Geoff Whelan)

It was said that an alternative name for this should have been "how to tweet and not end up in jail"!

Brief Intro to participants

Helen Dale - Lawyer qualified in Eng/Aus currently working in Scotland

Ian Rushton - Prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service

Simon Singh - Science writer and physicist

Simon Singh first brought up his personal experience with being sued for libel because he published an article in a newspaper. In libel cases, the publisher or web host of your work being questioned may also be subject to restrictions and repercussions from the action. This is because they are also held partly responsible under the law. If you have a blog, it may have to be taken or moved to a different hosting service. Even pointing out objective truths can raise legal cases!

Ian Rushton described the process for prosecuting against libel/harassment in the criminal courts. There are 2 bars that need to be passed before this can be considered: evidential criteria (i.e. can it proved) and also public interest considerations (will it benefit the public to challenge the article/words etc.). The latter is more important in the context of social media. Two offenses that will definitely be reportable and convictable are revealing the identities of victims to certain crimes e.g. rapes; and making credible threats (i.e. threats containing details about plans to commit a crime).

Helen Dale described how Scottish law is actually more similar to European than English law. The CPS is replaced by the Prosecutor Fiscal. Scotland has stronger rules in place to protect freedom of speech and a higher bar as to what represents harassment for example. However, when this does occur, it is harder to defend against since the accused must prove their innocence (so burden of proof is reversed). In Scotland an "In Rixa" rule exists whereby comments made in the heat of an argument cannot be considered for claims of defamation. She highlighted the problems encountered in the "Old Firm" football rivalry where in Glasgow, Celtic vs. Rangers animosity has caused so much tension and trouble over many years. Violence and threats to people including sending bullets in the mail continue to this day. The law concerning "breach of the peace", previously a catch-all term used by the government to basically stop people doing what they didn't approve of, has been redefined.

The topic of free speech stacked against unwanted threats and harassment was broached. Only "grossly offensive" language is considered punishable by law. Merely experience "offensive" behaviour is not enough. But the line between what is offensive and what is grossly offensive is sometimes hard to define. An example of behaviour that is certainly grossly offensive is posting images of dead suicide victims. To be able to take action against most grossly offensive behaviour, we will need a "credible threat" including details of a planned crime; or at least a contextual backup for credibility, for example, there are precedents for this type of action and there is evidence that the person making the threat has the will and means to carry it out.

11) Activism and Good Thinking (Panel Discussion with Simon Singh, Richard Saunders and Michael Marshall)

Brief Intro to participants

Simon Singh - Science writer and physicist

Richard Saunders - Australian TV star, podcaster, and skeptic

Michael Marshall - PR guff exposer and co-founder/ co-host of Merseyside Skeptics and the podcast Skeptics with a K

Simon Singh began by mentioning how his Good Thinking organisation had made grants to fund skeptical activism, e.g Horsham Skeptics, South East Skeptics in the Pub and Kent skeptics to expand their movement. Edinburgh skeptics are using funding to appeal to deaf and hard of hearing people by arranging for signers at their events. Leicester Skeptics organised a campaign of complaints against chiropractic services who had made bold claims of the benefits of chiropractic (of course with very little evidence). They asked for the chiropractic governing body in the UK to better assess these claims for accuracy. Strangely enough, this campaign caused many of the claims to be brought down from websites within 12 minutes and was more effective than years of regulatory activities!

Simon Singh's Sense about Science activities were also brought up - acting against homeopathy peddlers who were claiming that their remedies could protect travellers against malaria if they went on a trip to Africa. Many of these dodgy providers were quite happy to send someone out there with only homeopathy instead of real malaria medicine - this represents a shocking failure in duty of care. He also mentioned his encounter with Psychic Sally when he actually went to one of her shows and built up the nerve to ask her the question - "why won't you agree to being tested?". Apparently she flipped on stage and had a real go at him. Afterwards, he stayed behind with some of her fans and talked to them about it, how it would be up to her to create the test she could complete successfully and this was not something that he was setting up himself for her to fail. It turned out that the fans were also concerned about her unwillingness to be tested, and agreed that she should do so. However Sally herself still refused! What a crowd-pleaser...

Richard Saunders was well known for his activism against the Power Balance bracelets (a bit like Shuzy bands). These products had previously failed to demonstrate their effectiveness in trials. Psychics are his real area of expertise. He mentioned an Australian AltMed Conference called Mind Body Spirit which he suggested could be renamed "Mind Body Wallet"! The need to engage against quackery was espoused, however it is always important to not remain in our echo chamber and sometimes listen to different opinions. We must not get too frustrated if we don't manage to convert people away from woo, at least we can learn what methods don't work in different circumstances.

Michael Marshall highlighted the need to "cause mischief" as a skeptic and do what AltMed and other quackery or woo want us to do the least. He mentioned the 10:23 campaign against homeopathy as a prime example of this. Internet activism was a very useful tool if we can't actually get out there and take part in traditional activism. A good tip was offered for those wanting to participate - look through your local papers, listen to the radio and watch local TV news for any dodgy claims or suspect organisations, and report them to your local Skeptics or Skeptics in the Pub group.