Think your WhatsApp chats are private? Think again
Court finds messages sent to one person can still amount to defamation.
Did you “slander” someone in a private WhatsApp conversation? You could still be liable for damages.
Many assume that personal correspondence between two people is immune from defamation claims. However, a recent ruling clarifies that the law does not require a broad “audience” for a statement to be considered defamatory. Even messages sent in a private WhatsApp exchange between two individuals about a third party may meet the legal definition of defamation.
In the case at hand, the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court heard a monetary claim seeking 140,000 shekels (approximately $45,000) in damages. The plaintiff argued that the defendant had published defamatory statements about her in WhatsApp messages exchanged with a mutual acquaintance.
Both women live in the same neighborhood, in adjacent buildings, and were previously friends who collaborated on community initiatives. The plaintiff, represented by attorney Navot Tel-Zur, described herself as deeply involved in volunteer work, including distributing food and clothing to those in need, assisting with housing, and renovating buildings for the homeless.
The defendant, represented by attorney Ofer Shahal, also described herself as a long-time social activist, volunteering with the police, helping tenants find housing without brokerage fees, and managing community initiatives.
The lawsuit focused on messages the defendant sent via WhatsApp to a mutual acquaintance, in which she allegedly described the plaintiff as “narcissistic” and a “criminal,” and implied improper financial conduct.
The plaintiff argued that these statements were false and intended to harm her reputation, turning her into a subject of ridicule and damaging her standing in the community. She claimed that following the messages, some neighbors began distancing themselves from her, harming both her personal reputation and her volunteer work.
The defendant, however, argued that the lawsuit was filed in bad faith and was vindictive and disproportionate. She maintained that the messages did not constitute defamation because they were part of a private conversation, shared in good faith as personal opinion with a close acquaintance, without any intent to publish or distribute them.
The court rejected this argument.
Judge Lior Gelbard ruled that under Israeli defamation law, it is sufficient for a statement to reach even one person other than the subject of the statement to qualify as “publication.” In this case, the mutual acquaintance met that threshold.
The judge found that while terms such as “bad” or “narcissistic” might not, on their own, constitute defamation, the defendant went further by calling the plaintiff a “criminal” and implying financial misconduct, even citing a specific example. Such statements, the court held, could lower a reasonable person’s opinion of the plaintiff and therefore meet the standard for defamation.
At the same time, the judge emphasized the need for restraint in awarding damages in cases involving private conversations. Although the statements were deemed defamatory, the court awarded only symbolic compensation of 4,000 shekels ($1,285).
That amount was ultimately offset entirely, as the court also ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant 4,000 shekels in legal costs, citing the excessive size of the claim relative to the nature of the dispute. As a result, the claim was effectively dismissed.
Attorney Shahal, representing the defendant, said the ruling highlights the need to revisit the legal definition of “publication.” “A private conversation between two people should be completely free,” he argued, adding that defamation should require at least one additional person beyond the two participants in the conversation.
Attorney Tel-Zur, representing the plaintiff, took the opposite view, welcoming what he described as an important message: defamatory statements made in WhatsApp messages can give rise to legal liability.
