个人陈述代写：关于诽谤问题

个人陈述代写：关于诽谤问题

在营销过程中需要考虑许多因素。虚假信息营销是伴随着诽谤问题而产生的一系列违法行为。这需要传播这些观点的媒体理解。诽谤指控可以由个人和公司提起。有时，为了让潜在客户远离竞争对手，可能会使用一些词语，让客户不要与竞争对手进行购买。如果这些陈述被认为是诽谤，那么将会有严重的后果(Thompson, 2013)。受影响的公司或原告可以对该公司提起诉讼。公关人员对诽谤罪的理解是十分必要的。所陈述的词语不应以任何可能在思想上带有恶意的方式加以解释。需要考虑与感知相关的差异因素。在表达上应加以澄清，任何模棱两可的术语都应予以摒弃。对于诽谤的罪责和管辖权由个别法官决定。2013年的《诽谤法》讨论了各种渠道诽谤的具体含义。
这是政府的一个尝试，以确保法律的模糊方面变得更加清晰。它取代了1996年《诽谤法》的条款。在这项法律中，承载用户生成内容的网站不被认为是有责任的，因为它们不涉及发布内容。开发内容的人负有责任(Thompson, 2013)。这并不意味着网站所有者没有责任。一般来说，法律规定，人们不能控制用户生成的内容，应该有一个条款来删除任何虚假的内容或煽动性的内容。2013年《诽谤法》第5节对此进行了解释。在新的规则中，公司有更多的责任确保发布适当的内容。在新的法律中，社交媒体用户和内容开发者都有责任。他们是发布冒犯性材料的人。他们将被认为是诽谤指控的适当对象。在这些行为中，有两个因素更清楚地表达出来，那就是诽谤和诽谤。

个人陈述代写：关于诽谤问题

In the process of marketing a number of factors need to be considered. Marketing of deceptive information is a series offense along with the issue of defamation. This needs to be understood by the media outlets that propagate the views. Defamation claims can be brought on by individuals and the companies. Sometimes in intent to gently manoeuvre the potential customer from competitors, there would be use of words that could make the customer to not make purchases with the rival company. If the statements are considered to be libel then there would be serious consequences (Thompson, 2013). The company that is affected or the plaintiffs can bring in charges against the company.It is imperative to understand the meaning of libel by the PR professionals. The words that are stated should not be construed in any way that could be malicious in thought. The differential factors that are associated with perception need to be considered. There should be clarified in expression and any ambiguous terms should be discarded. The culpability and the jurisdiction are determined by the individual judges regarding the defamation. The Defamation act of 2013 discusses about the specific implication of defamation by the various outlets.
This was an attempt by the government to ensure that the nebulous aspects of the law are made much clearer. It supersedes the clause sin the Defamation act of 1996. In this law the website hosting user generated content are not considered to be liable as they are not involved in the posting of the content. The onus of the responsibility falls on the people developing the content (Thompson, 2013). This does not mean that the website owners are free from blame. In general, the law states that the people cannot control the user generated content and that there should be a provision in place to remove any fallacious content or inflammatory content. This has been explained in the Section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013. In the newer rules, there is more responsibility by the companies to ensure that they post the appropriate content. In the newer laws the social media users and the content developers are liable. They are the people who post the offending material. They will be considered as the appropriate target for the defamatory claim. Two factors are more clearly articulated in these acts is the slander and libel.