Social Media Someone Says "426"

Urgent message: While competition for patients among urgent care operators tin be intense, speaking negatively of a competitor online tin can lead to unwanted liability.

Alan A. Ayers, MBA, MAcc

Competition between businesses tin can exist intense. In some instances, comparisons betwixt ane company and another can lead to disparaging and inaccurate claims. This tin result in unneeded liability for an urgent care owner. Here, we examine how the police of defamation in social media applies to urgent care centers and the rights and responsibilities of their owners.

In 2017, the owner of a St. Louis urgent intendance was sued by a rival urgent intendance provider for defaming the company on Facebook.¹ The fight between the ii centers started innocently with a customer tagging the defendant urgent care in a Facebook mail, commenting that they recommended their services. The possessor of that urgent intendance responded with "Thank you. And past the way, we have Medicaid and nosotros don't CT scan people unnecessarily."¹

Even though the other urgent care went unnamed, the plaintiff had its chaser send a letter demanding that the defendant delete the posts. That set off the fireworks, and the defendant named its competitor in subsequent inflammatory online statements. The plaintiff obtained a temporary restraining order, and the posts were removed. Only the fight escalated, with the plaintiff urgent care bringing an action alleging defamation and tortious interference, and seeking an injunction to bar further posts by the competitor.¹ The plaintiff claimed that its reputation was impacted negatively by the social media posts and sought an unspecified amount of damages, attorney's fees, and other costs.²

In addition to a possible defamation claim, urgent intendance owners may need to defend claims of tortious interference with existing contracts and prospective concern relations, unfair contest, and imitation advertisement.

Social Media and Defamation in Full general

There are two master kinds of defamation—libel, which is written defamation, and slander, which is oral defamation. When an alleged defamatory statement is made online or through social media—Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Yelp, or another application—information technology involves the written word. As such, it's libel.ⁱⁱⁱ

As opposed to a libelous argument in a newspaper, a social media post creates a bit more complexity because the law depends on several factors:

• The state in which the victim resides
• The country in which the alleged defamer resides
• The "contacts" the defamer has had with the victim'due south land, if any

The business organisation here is whether an urgent care possessor tin can sue in his local jurisdiction. If the competitor is a national chain with its headquarters on the other side of the state, it may arrive more difficult—but not incommunicable. A qualified attorney can assistance yous with the best strategies and result.^iv

The Legalities

Although each land'south laws can be dissimilar, basically defamation is a imitation statement that is public and injurious to the victim'southward reputation.⁵ To prevail on a defamation lawsuit, a victim must exist able to prove that the statement was false (the truth is a complete defense). The alleged defamatory statement must exist presented equally a fact and not every bit an opinion.^half-dozen-8 The argument is public when the content is posted on the webpage. It doesn't matter if the website is read by a dozen people or information technology's on a Kardashian'southward Twitter feed seen by millions.

Finally, information technology's disquisitional that the victim show specific damages. In the business setting, this is usually accomplished past providing prove that the victim'southward reputation has been damaged, such as with a loss of business or lost profits.^vi-eight

Untrue statements

On the other manus, some statements are so inherently injurious that a victim may not be required to bear witness actual damages.^nine This is known every bit per se defamation. Some examples are statements that charge an individual or entity with an infamous crime or tend to discipline it to "hatred, distrust, ridicule, contempt, or disgrace."¹⁰ Other examples include claims of being incompetent in the profession, of certain sexual conduct, or of having a "loathsome" disease.^eleven-13 These statements would likely be considered defamatory regardless of their veracity.¹⁴

Similarly, if an employee posts information that's partially true and partially faux, she can exist found liable for defamation. Perhaps the contest doesn't take military insurance: it would be dangerous to country that that the urgent care didn't care well-nigh the military and refused to treat them.

A good dominion of pollex in judging if a person'southward reputation has been damaged is if the statement would cause the person's peers to call up less of him.

The Protections

You tin protect your urgent care from a competitor'due south defamation lawsuit by posting only factually accurate statements. If you want to mail service something, be sure information technology'due south true before you post.^fifteen Bank check your facts.

Fifty-fifty if a statement's true about a competitor, it still may not exist the wisest affair to make it known. Consider your own visitor'southward reputation as you potentially tarnish another's. Just like words, images can also exist defamatory.¹⁶ Don't alter photos or create memes to make another urgent intendance wait bad.

Ask yourself: What does it say virtually your urgent care if you lot knock down the competition? Perhaps it'due south improve to take the high route. Ethical marketing may produce tangible benefits for your urgent care business. There's a lot to be said for a provider that exhibits integrity. New clients will appreciate this, and your business will develop loyalty and increased customer retention. Referrals for your upstanding urgent care will also grow.¹⁷

Medical Ethics

In addition to the legal parameters of social media statements, healthcare owners and operators must also be bound by medical ethics that accept traditionally discouraged disparaging competitors and acting in an unprofessional mode.

The 1969 AMA Judicial Council Opinions and Reports states that "[t]he practice of medicine should not exist commercialized nor treated equally a commodity of trade."¹⁸ Healthcare professionals have an ethical and legal responsibility to maintain their patients' confidentiality^.nineteen

With this in mind, urgent care owners, operators, and employees must empathize their ethical responsibilities to their patients. More than a few Millennials and other young people will exist working at your urgent intendance middle. This ways that their principal mode of communication may exist via smartphone and apps where stream-of-consciousness entries are the norm. Emphasize the importance of patient confidentiality, as well as their responsibleness in representing the visitor in all comments, blogs, posts, and online communications in the best possible light and with the highest standards.^20,21

Takeaway

It may sound likewise easy, merely mutual sense is a good approximate of how you should human action or react to a social media mail service that mentions your urgent care. The Golden Rule is a good yardstick, besides.

If you or an employee is blogging or writing on a Facebook page or submitting comments on a competitor's website, review site, or other social media site, be certain that you lot have all your facts absolutely correct earlier posting your statement. Again, think near information technology ethically and consider whether to send the statement at all.

When submitting posts or comments on social media, use extreme caution and avoid making any "gray area" statements that could be construed as defamation. While a statement may, in the end, not exist judged to be defamatory, your business doesn't need the problem and expense of defending a lawsuit to find out.

If you believe that your business has been defamed online, contact a qualified attorney to discuss your legal options and the wisest course of activity. A retraction and an online amends may end the matter quickly and to your satisfaction. If the statements are more than severe and are causing damage, your legal counsel may propose more ambitious action.

When considering posting something almost a competitor, think Abraham Lincoln. When Abe wanted to fire off a nastygram, he'd compose what he called a "hot letter." He'd get all of his acrimony and hostilities out into a letter—so put it in his desk drawer until he cooled down. Then he'd write on the pinnacle of it: "Never sent. Never signed."²²

References

1. Fenske S. St. Louis doctor sued later on blasting a boyfriend urgent intendance provider on Facebook. St. Louis Riverfront Times. Oct eleven, 2017.
2. Liss Due south. Urgent intendance competitors in St. Louis Canton court over defamation claims. St. Louis Post-Acceleration. October 9, 2017.
3. Social Media and Online Defamation. Nolo. Available at: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/social-media-online-defamation.html. Accessed February viii, 2019.
4. Defamatory Social Media Posts—Can I Sue Someone for Bashing Me Online? HR.org. Available at: https://world wide web.hg.org/legal-articles/defamatory-social-media-posts-can-i-sue-someone-for-bashing-me-online-34430. Accessed February 9, 2019.
5. Bedford v Spassoff. 520 Due south.W.3d 901, 904 (Tex. 2017).
6. Dallas Morning News, Inc. v Tatum. 554 S.Westward.3d 614, 626 (Tex. 2018).
7. Lubin five Kunin. 117 Nev. 107, 112, 17 P.3d 422, 426 (Nev. 2001)
8. Yeager v Local Matrimony 20, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am. 6 Ohio St.3d 369, 372, 453 North.East.2d 666 (Ohio 1983).
9. Paulson v Cosmetic Dermatology, Inc., Civil Activeness No. 17-20094-Civ-Scola, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88031, at *7 (Due south.D. Fla. June 8, 2017).
10. Scobie v Taylor, No. thirteen-60457-Civ, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99786, at *6 (S.D. Fla. July 17, 2013).

11.Gordon v Boyles, 99 P.3d 75, 79 (Colo. App. 2004).

12. Metropolis Co. v Croasdell, 145 Fla. 455, 199 So. 568, 569 (Fla. 1941).
13. Fun Spot of Fla. v Magical Midway of Cent. Fla., Ltd., 242 F. Supp. 2d 1183, 1197 (M.D. Fla. 2002).
14. MacLeod 5 Tribune Publishing Co., 52 Cal.2nd 536, 549 (Cal. 1959), quoting Cal. Civ. Code § 45a.
15. Awad R. 3 social media mistakes that could get you sued! Incomediary.com. Available at: https://www.incomediary.com/social-media-mistakes. Accessed February 8, 2019.
16. Hinson 5 Yates, No. 1:17-cv-639, 2018 U.South. Dist. LEXIS 127919, at *13 (Westward.D. Mich. July 9, 2018).
17. Anderson B. Badmouthing the contest is a losing suggestion. Think Advisor. Available at: https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2015/09/09/badmouthing-the-competition-is-a-losing-propositio/?slreturn=20181115222012.
18. Veatch RM. Ethical dilemmas of for-profit enterprise in health care. Found of Medicine. Bachelor at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216766/. Accessed February 8, 2019.
19. Mansfield SJ, Morrison SG, Stephens HO, et al. Social media and the medical profession. Med J Aust. 2011;194:642–644.
20. The American Medical Clan (AMA) opposes the publication of inaccurate, unreliable, or meaningless healthcare data, and advocates that physicians be immune to review any information before its online publication.
21. Azu MC, Lilley EJ, Kolli AH. Social media, surgeons, and the cyberspace: an era or an error? Am Surg. 2012;78(v):555-558.
22. Konnikov Yard. The lost fine art of the unsent aroused letter of the alphabet. The New York Times. March 22, 2014.

Alan A. Ayers, MBA, MAcc is Chief Executive Officer of Velocity Urgent Care and is Practice Management Editor of The Journal of Urgent Care Medicine.

President of Experity Networks and is Practice Management Editor of The Periodical of Urgent Care Medicine

Share this post