SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A parent whose child goes to a high school in the Wake County Public School System has been sued after criticizing the math curriculum used in the district.
Utah-based "Mathematics Vision Project" or "MVP," filed a lawsuit against Blain Dillard, whose son attends Green Hope High in Cary.
Dillard has been vocal about his opposition to the MVP curriculum, which is student-driven and focuses on group work, posting on his website, blog and social media.
The lawsuit obtained by ABC11 said, "In or around March 2019, Dillard commenced a crusade against MVP, claiming that MVP is ineffective and has harmed many students."
It alleges that some of Dillard's statements were false and defamatory and harmed the company financially.
https://abc11.com/education/wake-schools-parent-sued-after-criticizing-math-curriculum/5430840/
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 11 2019, @04:42AM (1 child)
You don't have to show malice in most states for defamation against a private entity like this and I doubt selling curriculum to a school district would make you an LPPF. However, even if they did, N.C. has said, “A defendant acts with malice when he wantonly does that which a man of reasonable intelligence would know to be contrary to his duty and which he intends to be prejudicial or injurious to another.” Considering the whole purpose of the father's statement was to cause the school to stop using the curriculum, and thereby economically injury the publisher, I think the malice threshold is easy to reach in this case.
I think it is actually the other elements that come more into play: False statement of fact; Cause of injury to the plaintiff’s reputation; Of and concerning the plaintiff; Published to a third person. Obviously this was published to a third party and is concerning to the plaintiff. But, if the court doesn't consider this defamation per se, under the "Statements which tend to impeach a person in their trade or profession" standard, then there is question as to whether his actions (and not their reaction) that caused the damage to their reputation. In addition, they'd have to get that first element. Now, I've not seen their complaint, but most of what I could think of a parent saying would obviously be true ("they work in groups") or a lay opinion understood as a lay opinion ("based on what I've seen, I don't think my kid isn't learning").
(Score: 1) by metallurge on Monday August 12 2019, @03:01AM
With that definition of economic injury, any criticism is silenced. That cannot be the standard.