• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Has Dr Steven Novella been libelled?

Zelenius

Muse
Zelenius
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
908
This article by Tim Bolen, a self-described "consumer advocate" has got to be the most vicious, as well as most dishonest attack piece against Dr Steven Novella I have read to date. I have read a few other anti-Novella attack pieces on some "alt-med" message boards, especially after Novella's appearance on Dr Oz in which he defended scientific medicine against Dr Oz's constant pushing of quackery, but this takes the cake for its extreme insults, and possibly libelous statements.

In particular, Tim Bolen wrote: "Novella has been on my radar for a while as I put together the pieces of who the 2011 quackbuster team really are. I graph how they operate. He fits, easily, into the usual quackbuster pattern of fake resume, crap career, and, like Stephen Barrett, a molten hatred for those in the health professions who, through their own education and abilities, accomplish positive things and get deserved credit for it."

He goes on to say: "Novella claims to be a neurology professor at Yale University, and throws the name "Yale" around like he was throwing seed to the morning chickens - but, to me, that is an outright fabrication. Novella, evidence shows, works for a medical center that "rents" the name "Yale" from the University, who then, assuming the monthly payments are up to date, gets to claim that all their staff doctors are, in fact, professors at Yale (insert bad smell here)."

The author seems to be homophobic as well: "What am I looking for? Knowing what I know about Randi's sexual proclivities, that Randi/Novella video, and Novella's obvious relationship with James Randi, has raised red flags with me about the ENTIRE pseudo-skeptic movement."

The "fake resume" accusation, as well as claiming Dr Novella isn't really a professor at Yale(he calls this a "fabrication") appear to be libelous. It is so easy to prove these are lies meant to damage Dr Novella's reputation.

I am not that familiar with libel law, and ultimately it is up to Dr Novella himself what to do with such a sick attack piece. I believe in free speech but this crosses the line, this attack piece almost makes Dr Novella look like he's a fake doctor with a fake resume.

I apologize if this has already been posted. Obviously, only so much can be done about this kind of attack.
 
It certainly looks as though he has. The important question is not so much if he's been libelled, but whether he should actually do anything about it. The problem with suing is that it could play straight into the hands of the quacks by giving them the opportunity to claim he's trying to suppress dissent and just get money for himself.

As long as it remains on some random blog and isn't being reported in any real news outlets, I think his best option would be at most to post a rebuttal somewhere, or to simply ignore it entirely.
 
he probably has been libelled, but I'm not sure if I'd take action against it if I were him. If he takes something like this to court, he'll just be giving greater audience to this idiot's lies. At most he should just point out the ways in which this guy is wrong.
 
Zelenius said:
He goes on to say: "Novella claims to be a neurology professor at Yale University, and throws the name "Yale" around like he was throwing seed to the morning chickens - but, to me, that is an outright fabrication.
Click to expand...

Sounds like someone needs to inform Yale, because they seem to think he is a neurology professor there, too.

http://medicine.yale.edu/neurology/people/steven_novella.profile

Honestly, how stupid does he think people are? Sadly, there are apparently people who fall for this crap.
 
From the wiki page on defamation:
Most states recognize that some categories of statements are considered to be defamatory per se, such that people making a defamation claim for these statements do not need to prove that the statement was defamatory.[88]
...
Defamation per se
The four (4) categories of slander that are actionable per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required.
Click to expand...

IANAL, of course, but it sure seems like the attack falls in the per se category.

- Dr. Trintignant
 
Cuddles said:
It certainly looks as though he has. The important question is not so much if he's been libelled, but whether he should actually do anything about it. The problem with suing is that it could play straight into the hands of the quacks by giving them the opportunity to claim he's trying to suppress dissent and just get money for himself.

As long as it remains on some random blog and isn't being reported in any real news outlets, I think his best option would be at most to post a rebuttal somewhere, or to simply ignore it entirely.
Click to expand...

I happen to believe Dr Novella should just ignore it was well, and should only post a rebuttal if this wacko attacks him again. It was a post by an irrelevant individual on an irrelevant site.

Perhaps you're right; this clown is begging for a libel suit, just for the attention.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
In prior years, implying that somebody is a homosexual has been ruled to meet that test.

However, I wonder if that has held up with the changing times?
Click to expand...

That is an interesting question, but I was referring to the fact that Steve is married. Thus, the libelous claim is that he is an adulterer.

- Dr. Trintignant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom