Law and Society 5.1: Seaton v. TripAdvisor, 728 F.3d 592 (2013) Facts: Kenneth Seaton was the sole proprietor of the Grand Resort Hotel and Convention Center in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Seaton operated the Grand Resort since 1982 and established it as a valuable business in the state and for tourists traveling to the Great Smoky Mountains. TripAdvisor, a worldwide company in the business of conducting surveys on hotels and restaurants throughout the world, conducted a survey in 2011 of its users that was titled "The 2011 Dirtiest Hotels as Reported by Travelers on TripAdvisor." Number one on this list was the Grand Resort in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Included with the survey was a photo of a ripped bedspread along with a quote: "There was dirt at least inch thick in the bathtub which was filled with lots of dark hair." It also had a thumbs-down image next to this statement: "87% of reviewers do not recommend this hotel." Seaton sued TripAdvisor for $10 million for defamation and lost business. TripAdvisor claimed that Grand Resort's placement on the list was protected speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because the list does not make any factual claims. Issue: Whether TripAdvisor's list claiming the Grand Resort is the dirtiest hotel is a statement of fact and therefore defamatory? Ruling: No, TripAdvisor's list claiming the Grand Resort is the dirtiest hotel in America is not a statement of fact. Because TripAdvisor considers itself providing "the world's most trusted travel advice," Seaton claimed that placement on this list connotes a statement of fact. We disagree. First, TripAdvisor's use of the word dirtiest is a loose, hyperbolic term because it is the superlative of an adjective. No reader of TripAdvisor's list would understand the Grand Resort to be, objectively, the dirtiest hotel in all of the Americas. Thus, it is clear to us, as it would be to any reader, that TripAdvisor is not stating that Grand Resort is the dirtiest hotel in America as an actual assertion of fact. The general tenor of the list supports this conclusion. On the webpage where the list appears, TripAdvisor clearly states the list is "reported by travelers on TripAdvisor." The implication is clear: The rankings are based on the subjective reviews of TripAdvisor users, not on objectively verifiable facts. Based on this, readers would know that TripAdvisor did not conduct a scientific study to determine which 10 hotels were objectively the dirtiest in America but instead would understand the list to be the opinions of travelers who use TripAdvisor. Discussion Questions 1. Who generates most of the content on TripAdvisor? 2. How does a site like TripAdvisor make money? Do you think its business model contributed to its decision to run a list like this? 3. Who are the stakeholders in a decision to run a list like the one run by TripAdvisor? Critical Thinking Do you think the Grand Resort lost business because of the list? Does it seem fair that it should suffer from TripAdvisor's list and not be able to recover any damages from the company? Explain your answer. What other strategy could TripAdvisor have used to generate traffic and not get sued for defamation?