Understanding Defenses Before You File (or Respond)
Whether you're considering a defamation claim or responding to one, understanding the standard defenses matters early, not after money has been spent. A statement that looks obviously false and damaging on its face can still survive a legal challenge if a recognized defense applies — and conversely, understanding these defenses helps a person who's been accused of posting something false assess their actual exposure.
What Typically Defeats a Claim
Truth
Truth is generally a complete defense. Courts typically require "substantial truth" — minor inaccuracies in an otherwise true statement usually aren't enough to support a claim.
Opinion
Statements that a reasonable reader would understand as subjective viewpoint, rather than a verifiable factual claim, are generally protected, even when phrased harshly.
Privilege
Certain statements made in specific contexts — such as testimony in a legal proceeding — carry privilege that can shield them from a defamation claim.
Anti-SLAPP Protections
Many states have "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" laws that let a defendant seek early dismissal, and sometimes attorney's fees, when a claim targets speech on a matter of public concern.
Opinion vs. Fact in Practice
Organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation publish detailed guidance distinguishing protected opinion from actionable factual claims in the review context specifically, since online reviews are one of the most common sources of defamation disputes. The general principle they emphasize — that hyperbole, obvious exaggeration, and clearly subjective assessments are protected even when unflattering — lines up with how most U.S. courts approach the question.