[dragonwriter]

What I wonder is, from a libel perspective, is putting an up-front disclaimer that your association of a person with information is done without even rudimentary validation that is true information about the person it is associated with a defense against libel, or just an admission of one of the key elements of the tort?

I'd be interested to see this litigated; I'm hoping the latter, because otherwise I expect the rate of algorithmic defamation to increase to rather intolerable levels in the not-to-distant future.

[mpclark]

From my newspaper days, no amount of disclaiming will get round the fact that they put a picture of the guy next to the article. The test in the UK is if whatever you publish will make a reasonable person think worse of an individual and there are only a handful of very specific defences available, the best of which is that whatever you say is true.

[diyorgasms]

Libel laws in the UK are notoriously very favorable to the plaintiff. At least in the US, the test is more along the lines of "knowingly false".