A devil incarnate, bribe-takers, butcher, monster, podly cham - Such opinions about doctors can be found in the online rankings, that encourage specialists to assess.
The idea is the following: assessing doctor, helping other patients make the right choice. What is important, outweigh the positive reviews. They account for about three-quarters of all content. There are also negative. Some doctors feel slandered - they want to prosecute Internet users. From various sides fall suggestions censorship, or at least a portal label.
Is Internet network thickens slander?
It turns out, that the strength of "destruction" of patient sites to evaluate physicians is huge! In one of the portals, opinion on the doctors looking a month 130 thousand. Internet users. Doctors can therefore have a feeling, Internet rankings is that the trash, where, under the cover of anonymity can throw anything.
The kim (wrong) write?
Most internists arouse emotions, dentists, gynecologists-obstetricians. Immediately after their pediatricians, family physicians and surgeons general to. When the names of some of the hundreds of professionals appears Posts. Among the negative reviews are detailed descriptions of medical errors, hospital situation, Running visits, but the kind of invective: a devil incarnate, monster. There are also anonymous, unparliamentary entries.
All opinions appear just under the full name of the doctor, specialization name and address data centers, in which they work. In this case, the issue is back boundaries of freedom of speech. This raises a number of questions also. Who is the anonymous? Is it actually dissatisfied patient, maybe ... the doctor's office with a competitive? And above all,, whether doctors, the anonymous slander in a special way damage the image, should not be in front of them specially protected?
Only not censor
Any ideas aimed at limiting the freedom of speech or censorship of speech met with an angry response from the community. Why else would the selected occupational groups have privileges other, than under the existing general principles?
Under the Law on electronic services, service should block access to illegal content, reviews, if it receives an official or reliable information, that the opinion is illegal (for example,. untruthful). In each site, patients have the opportunity to evaluate the published entry. This helps largely rate, whether the opinion is defamatory, or not. Therefore, doctors may request the removal of false opinion. Case every time will be considered individually and in concert with the person, that the opinion issued.
Doctors have also the possibility to publish their explanations.
Judicial practice
How should keep the doctor, an online forum which reads about himself, that is vile boor, monster, gburem, a loser ...
Fight for the removal of, argue, and can ignore?
Doctor functions in the public sphere, and because of the nature of these functions is subject to social control. The doctor, however, is not a civil servant and can not benefit from a level of legal protection. It does not matter, or write about something in the newspaper, on a pole in the center or on the Internet. It is important, what was written, a victim, whose good name has been violated, has the right to choose who sues: the owner or developer portal entry. It must also be able to reach this, who issues defamatory opinions. Judicial practice shows, that in such cases the responsibility of the author of the opinion. If the court is obliged to disclose the publisher identification number of the computer on the network. This opens the way to allow you to reach and hold responsible the author entry.
People will post:
With the difficult access to specialists, we can not be surprised, that Internet users are looking for and will look for both free health tips, as well as the recommendations of doctors, which are worth to go. It would, however, was, to major decisions, on your health, did not take in the context of anonymous posts.
On the basis of www.rynekzdrowia.pl
