Libel lawsuit filed against Cape blogger

The libel case was based, appropriately enough, on the dredging of dirt - or sand, at least.

A Cape Cod Today blogger last spring accused the people opposed to dredging Barnstable Harbor of not-in-my-backyard politicking. Naming their names - and using one off-color description - blogger Peter Robbins told his readers exactly whom to blame if their boats ran aground this summer.

Now the leading opponent is suing Robbins for libel, an increasingly common charge against bloggers. Robbins's lawyer counters that his free speech is at stake.

"It is silly to suggest that the statements made constitute libel," said Peter B. Morin, a lawyer who is also a Cape Cod Today blogger. "They're trying to punish him for expressing his personal opinion on the reason for the delay in the dredging of the harbor."

Plaintiff Joseph F. Dugas could not be reached for comment, and his lawyer, Richard Zabbo, would not discuss the case. The lawyer who helped residents appeal the dredging - Paul Revere III - also declined to comment since he is now one of those suing Robbins for libel. (The blog dubbed him as Paul "the dredge isn't coming" Revere III and an anonymous poster questioned his motives.)

The lawsuit is the latest challenge to the freedom of bloggers, who are subject to the same libel laws - though not the same editorial standards - as the mainstream media. While the First Amendment protects the right to state opinions, bloggers can get into trouble when they include factual statements in their postings, according to David Ardia, director of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society.

More than 500 blogger lawsuits have arisen in US courts - often generating more publicity than the posts that spawned them, Ardia said.

Indeed, some of the most controversial passages in the Robbins Report post on dredging were removed months ago at Revere's request. Now, those same comments appear in court papers, a matter of public record.

Still, the publicity is not wholly unwelcome for Cape Cod Today. While it hosts the blog, the website is not liable for its content under federal law.

"From a crass commercial standpoint, I'm almost hoping the judge doesn't throw it out," said Walter Brooks, the editor and publisher. "Paul Revere must be spinning in his grave."

What makes the Robbins case particularly interesting, Ardia said, is that his defense is citing Massachusetts' anti-SLAPP law, named for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. Such laws were enacted in 26 states so that citizens could voice their opinions about projects without being sued for defamation and silenced by developers or other powerful players.

"Often these arose in the context of environmental disputes, which is the irony in this case," said Ardia. "The parties are actually reversed."

Morin is asking a Barnstable Superior Court judge to dismiss the case, calling it a "textbook example of the justification for an anti-SLAPP statute." A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 16.

The libel suit alleges Robbins was wrong on the facts and wrong to characterize the opposition to dredging as frivolous and malicious. Permits would have been delayed even without neighbors' appeal to the state Department of Environmental Protection, and the residents opposed the project because they wanted the town to stop leaving dredged material on their beaches, the suit says.

Cape Cod Today is a website that posts news, weather, stories, and opinion - as well as some 200 local blogs - and prides itself on its scoops and investigations into local affairs. The website has been growing in readership - Brooks boasts some 700,000 unique visitors in one recent month - making it a player in Cape Cod civic affairs. Brooks started it, he said, because he was frustrated by local news coverage of the proposed offshore wind farm, which Cape Cod Today has championed.

But the site also aims to be controversial, and some blogs dwell on speculation and innuendo. When the Truro fire chief stepped down last spring, one blogger reported speculation that his departure was related to his department's handling of evidence in the investigation of the 2002 killing of fashion writer Christa Worthington. The fire chief soon was accused of - though never charged with - a sexual assault.

Bloggers can get into trouble by crossing the line between fact and opinion, Ardia said.

"If my blog is simply my opinion, then I'm not stating any facts. I can offend as many people as I want and I won't be open to a defamation claim," said Ardia.

Brooks said he is disturbed by the libel suit, which he views as part of a trend of trying to silence writers and critics. "It's power trying to stifle comment and dissent," Brooks said. "It's nothing different than has been going on every time a democracy's trying to rear its head. It's happening here. We'll go to the wall with this."

Correction: Because of a reporting error, a story in Monday's City & Region section about a libel lawsuit against a blogger incorrectly reported that more than 500 similar suits have been filed in US courts. That number includes legal threats, cease-and-desist orders, and disciplinary actions against bloggers, not just lawsuits, which constitute roughly two-thirds of the total, according to the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society.