I’ve written about the horrible state of libel laws in the UK before, but there are a couple of new developments:

1) Simon Singh wrote about the issue for the JREF’s Swift blog. He asks people to sign the online petition for reform, and it helps even if you’re not a UK citizen. In general I don’t support online petitions, but in this case it will have a real and important impact; they can present it personally to people who make the laws and show them this is an important issue. I signed. You should too.

2) Simon’s libel case goes before the Court of Appeal in London on Tuesday, February 23 (today for most folks reading this). No doubt the major media will be covering it, as it’s a big story. I’ll try to post something here if and when I hear anything.

You can find out more at the Libel Reform website, including how (if you’re local) you can go downtown to show support for Simon on Tuesday morning at 09:45 (here’s the location).

If you’re a regular reader, you know that the libel laws in the UK are truly awful. Instead of the burden of proof being on the accuser, as it should be, in the UK the burden is on the accused. So if I decide to sue you for something you wrote about me, it’s up to you to prove there was no malicious intent on your part. And it can cost you literally millions of dollars to defend yourself.

That, to be blunt, sucks. And it’s bad for freedom of expression, because it means that criticism of a claim can be substantially suppressed; who would want to speak out against, say, quacks, if they can sue you and cost you time and money?

And we know this is the case because skeptic Simon Singh is being sued under these draconian laws by the British Chiropractic Association for saying they happily promote "bogus" therapies. I’ve written about this many times.

That’s why I’m asking you to go to The Libel Reform Campaign website and sign their petition. They want 100,000 signatures by tomorrow so they can show it to Jack Straw, a Member of Parliament, and get some action started on this. These laws affect everyone on the planet (if you write something on the Internet, it’s entirely possible to be sued in the UK for it; this is called libel tourism and is a serious issue), so it doesn’t matter if you’re a UK citizen or not.

Please sign the petition. I did. And do it soon, so that we can make an impact on free speech everywhere.

The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe is one of my favorite podcasts. It’s funny, informative, goofy, but most importantly goes right to the heart of a lot of issues important to the critical thinker.

I’ve done a lot of interviews with them, and sometimes they call me at the last minute when there’s some breaking astronomy news. So a couple of weeks ago I wasn’t too surprised when Steve Novella sent me a note asking if I could record with them that evening for their annual year-end wrapup episode.

What did surprise me is why they wanted me on: the SGU listeners had voted for me as Skeptic of the Year!

Well, wow! I was really floored when they told me this during the interview. It was totally unexpected, and quite an honor. I made some jokes about it in the interview, but now that I’ve had some time to think about it, I want to reiterate how honored I am. It was a great year for skepticism and skeptics themselves, with Simon Singh publicly defending himself from craven chiropractors who tried to sue him into silence, Amy Wallace writing about antivaxxers in Wired magazine, the Australian Skeptics heroically taking on (and being attacked by) the awful antivax guru Meryl Dorey, Randi publicly fighting his cancer with medical science, and so many more.

In that company, I stand paradoxically humbled and proud. My sincere thanks to everyone who cast their vote my way on the SGU forums.

I always really like the SGU year-end wrapup; it’s fun to listen in on the rogues reminiscing on the past year. This one in particular is a great episode. Here’s a direct link to the MP3 of the show, and if you don’t already subscribe to SGU, then go do it now!

I have talked here many times about the atrocious libel laws in England, and how they are used by cranks and crackpots (and others) to clamp down on freedom of speech. Most notably, skeptic Simon Singh is being victimized by the British Chiropractic Association, who decided to sue him rather than actually defend their dodgy claims about their practice.

Simon’s case has started a grassroots campaign to reform the libel law there, and this has gained incredible momentum. The Libel Reform Campaign website was put together by the group Sense About Science to provide information on all this. It has news, affidavits, and much more, all set up to keep you informed on the progress made about this.

Freedom of speech is so important on so many levels, but it’s pertinent to you, BA Bloggees, because you know how pernicious and prevalent quackery is. Many of the people behind such antiscience — the antivaxxers, the chiropracters, and others — would love to see us, the voices of reality, shut off. So go take a look at the Libel Reform page. Sign up, sign the petition, and make sure that your voice will not only be heard, but will continue to be heard.

Crispian Jago may be our single greatest weapon against nonsense that exists when it comes to the public. Why would I say that? Just go and read his brilliant satirical page, "The Ladybird Book of Chiropractic Treatment and English Libel Law".

Incredible. He sets the bar pretty high for himself — he did the Skeptics playing cards (he even made one for me), a homeopathic urine video, and much more. He’s hysterically funny, with a laser-sharp wit. When most of us are grinding our teeth and fuming, he is responding with humor that cuts right through the garbage and exposes the fetid underbelly of antiscience nonsense like chiropractic.

If you liked his Young Readers book, then please Digg it! Help spread the word, and show the world that science cannot be silenced.

Hero journalist Simon Singh has written a fantastic article for The Times Online about his libel case in the UK and libel in general: how it gags journalists and keeps people from learning important information.

If this article makes you angry, good. Do something about it.

Recently, science writer Simon Singh was sued by the British Chiropractic Association for having the audacity of telling the truth in a newspaper article about chiropractic: while it may have some small efficacy when treating back problems, there is exactly zero good evidence that it can treat illnesses, and in fact can be very dangerous when people get their neck manipulated.

The Australian Skeptics posted Simon’s original article so that it would get more attention. And it worked, kinda: like a fly to honey, one chiropractor took offense at what was written, and decided to send them a nearly logic-free letter. That’s fine, and pretty much what I expect from a vocal alt-med devotée. As justified, Eran Segev, president of the Australian Skeptics, responded.

All well and good, until…

… two weeks after responding we received a letter from the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) indicating Mr Ierano [the chiropractor] has lodged a complaint against Australian Skeptics. The letter attached to the complaint was the same one that Australian Skeptics had received and responded to.

Well, that’s a bit odd! I mean, why go to the trouble to pursue legal action against someone responding to your claims when it should be easy to present a simple rebuttal based on the evidence that chiropractic works?

… oh, right.

What’s funny is that originally, the BCA (the group suing Simon in the UK) tried to defend their position, and presented a poorly-researched, off-topic press release that somehow managed to make them look worse. Apparently, that’s a theme amongst chiropractors trying to support some of their less reality-based claims.

And while I’m using a light-hearted tone here, I’ll note that this is a very serious issue: there are people out there trying to stifle free speech. It’s that simple. The UK libel laws are draconian and designed to shut up any protest, making scientific objections and investigations into potential and real quackery very difficult. As Eran says on the AS page:

Australian Skeptics sees this complaint as lacking any merit even if it did not include some factual errors (e.g. the claim that a British court ruled Simon’s article is biased). We have prepared a detailed response to the HCCC and will be defending our right to publish articles relating to any scientific issue, as long as they are backed by scientific evidence.

Good on ya, mate!