"Defamation is something whose publication is liable to -
- to humiliate a person in the eyes of others or to make him a target of hatred, contempt, or ridicule on their part;
- degrading a person for actions, behavior, or attributes attributed to him;
- harm a person in his office, whether a public office or any other position, in his business, occupation or profession;
- to degrade a person because of his race, origin, religion, place of residence, age, sex, sexual orientation or disability."
The element of "publication" is defined in section 2 of the Law and means the transmission of a message, in written orally or by other means, to a person other than the victim.
In this case, there is no dispute about the publication, and the dispute is on the question of whether the defendant's words amount to defamation within the meaning of the law.
In accordance with the law, it is sufficient that the publication is liable to humiliate or humiliate a person, so that it constitutes defamation, and there is no need to prove that he was humiliated or humiliated in practice.
The test in this matter is objective and there is no importance as to the intention of the advertiser or the manner in which the publication was understood by the plaintiff. As a rule, in order to determine whether the publication contains defamation, the court will interpret the publication according to the natural and ordinary meaning of its words. However, sometimes the defamation in the publication does not stem from the simple meaning of its words, but rather from what is implied or implied "between the lines" of the publication according to the understanding of a reasonable person. (Civil Appeal 1104/00 David Appel v. Ayala Hasson, (10 January 2002), para. 6, p. 617).
It is not the intention behind the publication that it will point to the existence of defamation, but rather the message with which it leaves the viewer. The publication will be examined in its entirety, since even the reasonable viewer, who sees the article, perceives the entirety (Civil Appeal 751/10 Anonymous v. Dr. Ilana Dayan-Orbach (February 8,2012), (hereinafter: "A.A. Ilana Dayan") paragraphs 83-84 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice (Vice-President) Rivlin.