On paper, defamation law looks simple: a false statement is published, a reputation is harmed, and the courts step in to address the damage.
The internet has changed that equation.
Today, some of the most damaging allegations spread through social media, where accusations can move faster than facts, especially when misinformation about LGBTQ+ people and organizations begins circulating online.
Two Ontario defamation cases, Rainbow Alliance Dryden et al. v. Webster and Canadian AIDS Treatment Information Exchange et al. v. Blackwell, exemplify how quickly online accusations can escalate into serious legal battles. Both cases arose after social media posts accused LGBTQ+ organizations and individuals of “grooming” children.
What makes these cases especially interesting is how the litigation unfolded. It’s the limits of online speech, the risks of turning cultural narratives into accusations of crime, and how courts determine the real meaning behind words posted on the internet.
The result was significant damage awards and an important reminder that anti-SLAPP protections and “public interest” defenses are not a license to publish harmful falsehoods online.
To unpack how these cases developed and what they mean for defamation law in the digital age, I sat down with Doug Judson, a lawyer in Northwestern Ontario who represented the plaintiffs and has been involved in a growing number of online defamation cases.
Doug shares how a case that started with a single social media post ended up producing one of the largest defamation awards of its kind in Canada.
Things you’ll learn;
- How online accusations of “grooming” against LGBTQ+ organizations turned into major defamation lawsuits
- Why the court rejected the argument that these posts were protected “public interest” commentary
- How anti-SLAPP motions work and why the defendant’s motion failed
- The role of expert evidence in explaining the social meaning of defamatory language
- Why summary judgment was the right strategy in these cases
- How courts assess malice in online defamation disputes
- The challenges of identifying and serving anonymous online defendants
- Why large defamation awards may matter, even when collecting the money is uncertain
Guest Bio
Doug Judson practices law with Judson Howie LLP, a firm based in Northwestern Ontario that works with clients across the province. Doug began his practice with a leading Canadian law firm. He has worked with the in-house legal teams of two financial institutions, has held posts in the federal public service in Ottawa, has served as a contract Crown Attorney, and has worked in economic development, health, and justice programming for Treaty #3 First Nations. Doug started his professional career on Parliament Hill as an aide to two former MPs, and has since been involved with federal, provincial, and municipal election campaigns. From 2018-2022, he served on the council of the Town of Fort Frances. Doug maintains a busy volunteer presence in the community. He currently serves on the boards of the Northwest Community Legal Clinic and Borderland Pride. Doug is also currently the President of the Rainy River District Law Association and Past Chair of the Federation of Ontario Law Associations. He has previously served on the executive of the Ontario Bar Association's sexual orientation and gender identity section, on the Law Society of Ontario’s Equity Advisory Group, as President of the Law Students’ Society of Ontario, and on the boards of the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre and Start Proud, a non-profit serving 2SLGBTQIA+ students and young professionals. https://www.douglasjudson.ca/.
About Your Host
Areta Lloyd practices estate and trusts litigation, with a particular focus on capacity litigation. She participates in public speaking, mentoring junior lawyers, and presenting courses on the topics of estates law, health law, and law practice management. Areta has written for several publications and wrote a column for the Alzheimer caregiver website ALZlive.com.
