What If??

* Defamation – harm done to a person’s reputation, and slander (spoken) versus libel (written)
   Defamation is a serious offense because it undermines someone's reputation so I think the offender should be punished. 
* Whether a statement is seen or heard by a third party or parties
   If a complaint is sent in a private letter to someone, then it's perfectly alright because it is private which means no one can gain access to it except the recipient. But if it's posted in the Internet, then it's wrong because literally everyone can get access to it and therefore, the person's reputation will be  affected.
* Whether the identity of the target is clear
    If the identity of the target is not stated clearly, then no punishment should be carried out.
* Anonymity – does it make the perpetrator more or less responsible?
   An anonymous person is definitely irresponsible because he/she is afraid to admit what he/she have done. This makes his/her information less reliable.
* Harassment – what does it involve?
   Harassment means any offensive behaviour that affects others. It can range from bullying, sexual harassment, racial harassment, religion harassment, stalking to cyberstalking, etc.
* Duty to provide a safe work or study environment – what roles do schools and teachers play?
   Schools should regulate school rules to ensure students and staffs can work in a safe environment. Everyone has the right to work and learn in a safe environment. Whoever breaks the rules must be subjected to suitable punishments in order to prevent them from re-offending.
* Right to freedom of expression – what limits should be placed on it?
   Everyone has the right to express themselves. They can choose to say or where whatever they want as a form of expression. But, of course, everything has its limits. Everyone is free to express their feelings as long as they don't jeopardize other people and bring up sensitive issues e.g. race and religion.
* Right to security of person – should people be protected from written or verbal attacks?
   Any form of defamation which is deemed offensive, whether written or verbal, should be subjected to punishment in order to protect one's reputation.
* Defences and confounding factors – what makes a possibly libellous statement okay?
   A libellous statement that does not contain name or personal details can't be charged because the perpetrator might be writing about things in general and so there's no sufficient evidence to carry out punishment.
* Truth – when the statement is accurate
   Law enforcers seek this from witnesses when they interrogate but sometimes this may be hard to achieve because usually witnesses are biased in their views.
* Fair comment - a legitimate journalistic intent
   This should not be subjected to the law because it is solely feedback on one's work and as long as it's not too offensive it's perfectly alright.
* “The reasonable person” - how offensive does something have to be before it becomes libellous?
   No law states how offensive something has to be before it can be classified as libellous. It is often subjected to the views of law enforcers and the society.