Libel and Slander

On Thursday, March 1, the law students at my law school held their annual "Libel Show." It was open season on 1L profs, including me. There was a skit called "Bowman's Bad Day," in which very brave (or foolish) 1L Leon Cameron channeled me giving a Contracts lecture. Clearly, next year's videographic team needs to get the camera and mike closer to the stage; much of what you hear is the sound of rowdy law students in the audience. But the gist of the skit is this: a self-important professor (where'd that come from, I wonder?) is teaching class hopped up on caffeine (got that one right), and he uses the purchase of a cup of coffee as an example of contract law in action (another bullseye). Of course, the barista gets the order wrong, and the prof goes ballistic.

OK, so I do wave my arms around a lot. And Mr. Cameron did an excellent job of imitating my speech patterns (sans curse words, of course). But here's the part that really struck me: how'd he know that I love cinammon? The coffee gag involves me ordering a cup of joe without any flavoring, and the barista puts cinammon in the coffee, and I go nuts. Now that's spooky. Did I mention my cinammon addiction in class? Or was this pure chance?

I suppose, perhaps, that it's like multiple choice exams: it's nice to know the answer, but once in a while you can get just as many points by being lucky.

Final question: if slander is defined as defamatory statements made in a fixed medium, and libel is defined as defamatory statements in a non-fixed representation (i.e., oral), then why is this show not called the Slander Show? Although I suppose that recording and posting the video on YouTube is slander.