Guest Author - Sylvia Cochran

The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 separate statements that sought to persuade the powers that be to ratify the Constitution. They are a surprising collection of opinion pieces written by the major players of the time, although they did not always use their real names. In some cases it was fairly obvious who hid behind a nom de plume, while at others times it was surprising to learn who was doing the writing.

Slander is the making of verbal statements that are fundamentally harmful to another person’s reputation. These may be lies, innuendo, rumors, but also truths to which the person making the slanderous comment became privy in a less than honest fashion. For example, if your priest were to talk at the church social about the things you mentioned in the privacy and sanctity of the confessional, he would be slandering you.

Libel is the other side of the same coin, but in this case the statements are given in a preserved medium that may be accessed time and again. It may be a blog, an article such as this one, a photo or a movie. To go back to our example, if your priest mentions your sins in the church announcement sheet and passes them out on Sunday, his action would be libelous.

Election mailers are mentioned by the Atlanta Journal Constitution when the author mentions anonymous mailings that have the express purpose of doing nothing but present a libelous account of the politician on the other side of the aisle. The originator of this little bit of legislation had the audacity to cite the Federalist Papers as the First Amendment right to free speech in justification of this process.

A close examination of the Federalist Papers shows that the main players in favor of the ratification were using spurious pseudonyms and aliases, but the debate was public and by no means considered hush hush. What was done by Georgia State Senator John Wiles, on the other hand, is little more than opening the door to anonymous groups banding together briefly for a purpose of sending out some information – right, wrong or indifferent – only to disband shortly thereafter when the questions start.

Voters in the meantime are inundated with mailers that are hard to discern from the real ones sent out by actual candidates, and if those did not contain enough half truths and innuendo, they now have to wade through those that contain blatant lies.