Nigerian Woman Faces Jail Time For Facebook Review of Tomato Sauce (techdirt.com) 72
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Techdirt: Nigeria doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation when it comes to respecting the speech rights of its own citizens, nor the rights of platforms that its citizens use. But I will admit that even with that reputation in place, I'm a bit at a loss as to why the country decided to arrest and charge a woman for violating those same laws because she wrote an unkind review of a can of tomato puree on Facebook: "A Nigerian woman who wrote an online review of a can of tomato puree is facing imprisonment after its manufacturer accused her of making a 'malicious allegation' that damaged its business. Chioma Okoli, a 39-year-old entrepreneur from Lagos, is being prosecuted and sued in civil court for allegedly breaching the country's cybercrime laws, in a case that has gripped the West African nation and sparked protests by locals who believe she is being persecuted for exercising her right to free speech."
By now you're wondering what actually happened here. Well, Okoli got on Facebook after having tried a can of Nagiko Tomato Mix, made by local Nigerian company Erisco Foods. Her initial post essentially complained about it being too sugary. So pretty standard fair for a review-type post on Facebook. When she started getting some mixed replies, some of them told her to stop trying to ruin the company and just buy something else, with one such message supposedly coming from a relative of the company's ownership. To that, she replied: "Okoli responded: 'Help me advise your brother to stop ki***ing people with his product, yesterday was my first time of using and it's pure sugar.'"
By the way, you can see all of this laid out by Erisco Foods itself on its own Facebook page. The company also claims that she exchanged messages with others talking about how she wanted to trash the product online so that nobody would buy it and that sort of thing. Whatever the truth about that situation is, this all stems from a poor review of a product posted online, which is the kind of speech countries with free speech laws typically protect. In Okoli's case, she was arrested shortly after those posts. [...] Okoli is pregnant and was placed in a cell during her arrest that had water leaking into it, by her account. She was also forced to apologize to Erisco Foods as part of her bond release, which she then publicly stated was done under duress and refused to apologize once out of holding. Okoli is also countersuing both Erisco Foods and the police, arguing for a violation of her speech rights.
By now you're wondering what actually happened here. Well, Okoli got on Facebook after having tried a can of Nagiko Tomato Mix, made by local Nigerian company Erisco Foods. Her initial post essentially complained about it being too sugary. So pretty standard fair for a review-type post on Facebook. When she started getting some mixed replies, some of them told her to stop trying to ruin the company and just buy something else, with one such message supposedly coming from a relative of the company's ownership. To that, she replied: "Okoli responded: 'Help me advise your brother to stop ki***ing people with his product, yesterday was my first time of using and it's pure sugar.'"
By the way, you can see all of this laid out by Erisco Foods itself on its own Facebook page. The company also claims that she exchanged messages with others talking about how she wanted to trash the product online so that nobody would buy it and that sort of thing. Whatever the truth about that situation is, this all stems from a poor review of a product posted online, which is the kind of speech countries with free speech laws typically protect. In Okoli's case, she was arrested shortly after those posts. [...] Okoli is pregnant and was placed in a cell during her arrest that had water leaking into it, by her account. She was also forced to apologize to Erisco Foods as part of her bond release, which she then publicly stated was done under duress and refused to apologize once out of holding. Okoli is also countersuing both Erisco Foods and the police, arguing for a violation of her speech rights.
Online safety laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you?
There's only one letter wrong in there and it's completely obvious from context clues that it should be "Did you for a moment think..." could maybe add some commas in there "Did you, for a moment, think..." but they're neither here nor there in terms of understanding what's being said.
but you get zero 0 days for running the prince sca (Score:2)
but you get zero 0 days for running the prince scam?
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
That scam is from Rudy G's basement, not a real Nigerian.
Re: (Score:3)
Not a real Nigerian?? Next you'll be telling me he's not a real prince!
Re: (Score:3)
Not a real Nigerian?? Next you'll be telling me he's not a real prince!
Of course he is! If you would respond to his messages & advance him the very reasonable amounts to unlock his frozen assets that he'll share with you, he would be coming to America!
Re: but you get zero 0 days for running the prince (Score:2)
That email scam likely originated in Ghana. Or at least it was most often perpetrated there.
This is what fascism looks like (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Mussolini didn't call for trade unionism, he called for the government to be in partnership with the businesses. The "bundle of sticks" was the businesses, and the axe embedded within it was the government.
Re:This is what fascism looks like (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. This is not fascism. You should read the article and you will see two aspects:
1. If you called me a murderer on a public platform without evidence to support your claims, I would sue you for defamation and libel. That would be fair. This person explicitly stated that the "product is killing people". Yes. She said tomato puree that was too sweet for her taste is killing people. This is exactly that the company has done. The right to free speech is not a license to spread misinformation and lies, especially if they transgress on someone else's reputation and rights. I am not saying whether the accusation is correct or not, that's for the person to justify to the court.
2. The person has then refused to accept court summons and be served, which is what led to her charge and arrest. This is perfectly standard in every country that follows some derivation of English Common law.
In my opinion, what is happening here is that people have a tendency to treat online publication as sort of vaporware - something that isn't real and will not have consequences. Like writing on Facebook is somehow less "real" than writing such a thing in the daily newspaper. This is especially true in parts of the world where widespread penetration of online platforms has happened relatively recently. People don't know how to deal with online media or don't even take it seriously. The more advanced countries like the US went through this phase in the 90s...resulting in several scandals about online postings etc. This person is discovering that just because it's on Facebook , she can't make serious accusations about homicide and expect to not face consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
England is pretty strict on Libel/Defamation, but here, saying it is "too sugary", is clearly a statement of opinion. After all, other people might prefer a sugary sauce.
Re: (Score:2)
I think they are more interested in the later comment of "Help me advise your brother to stop ki***ing people with his product" which took me longer than it should have to realize it was "killing." That's quite a statement and goes beyond opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Have a look at "Pure, White and Deadly" by John Yudkin. Then decide whether "too much sugar kills people" is opinion or fact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Statements of opinion are free speech. False statements regarding facts are sometimes not. It's not a question of long term health consequences of sugar. It's a statement that a particular brand of canned tomato sauce is specifically killing children.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sugar is one of the things that cause plenty of bad health that kills people [healthline.com] so she's very much right.
Re: (Score:2)
Too much sugar, chronically, over time, yes bad.
No one has or will die from just the sugar content in cans of tomato puree, nor will they get diabetes so long as they maintain their calorie intake within reasonable ranges. Your position is pedantic.
.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it defamation to say tobacco kills?
Specificity would matter. If that is all you said, without any other context, probably not. To liken it back to the story, she called the product too sugary. She also implied the product is killing people, because it's too sugary. She did not say that sugar kills. Further, it's a matter of sugar in excess and not sugar alone. Is the sugar content of the sauce high enough to cause health problems? I'm not saying things played out correctly, but in terms of the possibility of defamation it isn't cut and dry.
Re: (Score:2)
You're walking into the legal hole of having to prove that the concentration of sugar in the said product is a toxic concentration . Or over number of years , that has a detrimental effect. Sugar by the way, is one of the most harmless 'artificial' substances known to us in terms of toxicity and disease progression. It's less toxic than table salt. You would need the kind of evidence that exists for tobacco, that has accumulated over 50 years of research.
You just lose.
Re: (Score:2)
saying it is "too sugary", is clearly a statement of opinion
If you took the "too sugary" part from the parent's comment to be the relevant thing then you clearly don't understand what he said. The actual quote you're after is "stop killing people". Two very different things. The latter is not a statement of opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
It's obvious to any reasonable person that Okoli's remark about "killing people with your sauce" was a meant as a figure of speech, not a literal accusation of murder. It's as if you sued me for defamation because I said "You're killing me with all these dumb questions". If she had accused the company of literally killing customers by selling a product that was contaminated with arsenic, then this would be a basis for a serious defamation case.
It's also very strange that Okoli was arrested and jailed purs
Re: (Score:2)
That is an excellent point. There's definitely something missing from this story spun out of 100% pure WTF.
It seems they have no trouble making a contextual link from "your brother" to "Nagiko Tomato Mix". Yet they're unconvincingly obtuse with the idea that someone might ever use a commonplace figure of speech. Especially one that is simply parroting the same recurring nagging points we all receive from the various cults of nutritional science. It's not a new idea, and it's not original to Okoli.
Yeah,
Re: (Score:2)
"The right to free speech is not a license to spread misinformation and lies, especially if they transgress on someone else's reputation and rights. I am not saying whether the accusation is correct or not"
But you just agreed with the premise that the person is "spreading misinformation and lies".. so yes, you did support the accusation. Based on what you've said, I don''t doubt that you were one of the people in support of corporations censoring "covid misinformation", "Russian disinformation", etc.
Re: (Score:2)
No, moron. That is a statement of fact. Free speech is not a license to malign.The courts will decide if the specific statement made here is correct or not. But given the possibility that it isn’t, a defamation lawsuit is clearly a recourse available to the accused party.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
She said tomato puree that was too sweet for her taste is killing people.
I am disgusted by the headline. The headline should be "woman arrested for refusing to appear in court over a slander charge". Not even international news. The "news" sucks BAD.
2. The person has then refused to accept court summons and be served, which is what led to her charge and arrest.
Thank you for providing proper contextual information.
Tyranny wears many faces (Score:3)
Platforms like Facebook are one of the main ways people discuss matters of politics and ideology these days. Strictly in the sense of "should such places be free," I'm in the camp of "yes, they should." I believe it's important that people be able to discuss their opinions openly and freely without fear of substantial c
Re: (Score:2)
Platforms like Facebook are one of the main ways people discuss matters of politics and ideology these days.
And there's a lot of people attending a Taylor Swift concert too, but you have no right to use that as an excuse to jump on stage and take the mic. That's really what the issue boils down to, a belief that you're entitled access a platform's audience, because on the internet it's trivially easy to host your own speech elsewhere. You'll even see some right-wingers do the mental gymnastics to agree on this point, at least when the issue is a TikTok ban, because all those deplatformed users can just start po
Re: (Score:2)
So what's your point? This is an extreme example, but doesn't invalidate the other complaints you're mocking.
Re: (Score:2)
Labelling issue (Score:5, Insightful)
The article gives the impression that this is a matter of taste. But it's also a labeling issue, because there is most likely sugar in this product, and it's not mentioned on the label : https://www.nairaland.com/8030... [nairaland.com] Diabetics rely on labeling to make informed decisions, and this deceptive practice could indeed "kill" people.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Generally, I find the more complex a carbohydrate is, the better. They're slower to digest and thus don't spike my blood sugar like actual sugar will.
But I'm not insulin dependent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I ever have a low sugar event, I have a few cans of regular coke that will fix that right up. That's why I said I "generally" try to avoid sugar, IE monitoring the amounts I eat and keeping it low is an important part of my diet.
If I actually need to spike my blood sugar, it works quite well.
What you supposed to do with mozzarella like this? (Score:2, Funny)
Proximate cause (Score:5, Interesting)
The sweet, innocent summary naively states: "Whatever the truth about that situation is, this all stems from a poor review"
By dear BeauHD, plenty of valid legal action stems from initial activities that are completely benign. Nobody gets shot for speeding, but speeding can and has initiated a sequence of events that ends up with someone getting shot. You can't claim they were "shot for speeding" any more than you can claim they were shot for getting out of bed that morning, no matter how much staying in bed would have avoided the incident.
While I don't know anything about Nigerian law I do know something about law in general, and "whatever the truth about that situation is" is exactly what this is all about. When "a poor review" escalates into claims that a product is killing consumers and whatever else isn't quoted in the article or summary, there can be cause for legal action. The implausible linkage presented is nothing more than clickbait, playing to the biased trope that third-world laws (and Africans specifically) are backwards.
In related news ... (Score:3)
Stop what? (Score:1)
Sounds like they need to be review bombed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No surprise (Score:2)
reds (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Wonder if anyone else will get that.
LOL.
ki***ing? (Score:2)
kindling
"Help me advise your brother to stop [kindling] people with his product"?
That tomato paste must be spicy!
Re: ki***ing? (Score:1)
Nah. Everyone with diabetes should sue this company and others like it. Because why is there sugar in my tomato sauce and in my bread and in god damn everything.
Re: (Score:1)
[...] Because why is there sugar in my tomato sauce and in my bread and in god damn everything.
Because, despite sugar content being listed right there on the label in nutrition info, you chose to ignore it and bought the thing anyway, while being under no obligation to do so? Naaaaah, too easy an explanation, this must be a conspiracy by the weeeevil food industry!
Re: (Score:3)
The AC kind of beat me too it, but so that people don't need to expand: Nutrition label requirements are by country, not all countries require nutrition or even ingredient labels.
That said, searching the internet, I found a picture [twitter.com] of the backside of the can. No sign of a nutrition label.
Ingredients:
Tomatoes, Sugar, Salt, Soya Fibre, Modified Starch, Acidity Regulator(E330), Permitted Food Colour(E129)
Looking it up, E330 is citric acid. E129 is Red 40 in the USA. It's also synthetic, so how the can can
Re: (Score:2)
Because, despite sugar content being listed right there on the label in nutrition info
the alternative is to make your own. Sugar as an unnecessary additive is really unavoidable now. You can vote with your dollars, and not let companies seek to profit off abusing your taste buds and psychology. But a lot of people just try to feed their family on a budget.
Also, not ever country requires nutritional labeling.
Streisand effect (Score:1)
Now everyone will be pissed off at the company for targeting an individual in such a harsh way only for sharing their personal opinion. They kind of ruined their own reputation and should have just let this lie. Why would they pick such a stupid hill to die on?
Possible Tortious Interference (Score:1)
The summary is crap so we don't really know what happened but in the US there is the concept of "Tortious Interference" which is essentially when someone goes out of their way to unfairly fuck up someone else's business.
We have no idea if that's the case here but TI is not protected free speech.
If I were to go on FB and claim my new sneakers broke my ankles, they're dangerous and no one should buy from that company again -but- I made it up then they likely have a TI case against me I'll probably lose. Anot
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The summary is crap so we don't really know what happened but in the US there is the concept of "Tortious Interference" which is essentially when someone goes out of their way to unfairly fuck up someone else's business.
That said, it shouldn't take only 1-2 posts on a personal facebook page to reach that level.
Odds are that the company is now suffering with the Streisand effect, and suffering far more loss in sales due to the news stories about the lawsuit.
Sir, this is a Wendy's (Score:2)
Sauce Wars, A New Hope (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Slashdot,
I hope this letter finds you well.
I am Chroma Oloki, the son of my father's sister, a Princess of Anambra, Nigeria, who has been unjustly imprisoned for using Facebook to write about tomato sauce. Before her illegal arrest by corrupt officials, we were able to transfer her considerable financial fortune into Bitcoins invented by Satoshi Nakamuro.
The Princess is being held in a secret prison on Andoni Island. This small prison is run by the Erisco cartel which is inluencing the state government there by the brother of Mayor Nagiko. We are organizing a rescue effort and have a engaged a mercenary team including a pilot, his large hairy dog, a wise old former general and a strong young man from a local farm. They have a plan to "fly under the radar", driving their boat into the harbor, dress as guards to infiltrate the prison, free the Princess, and escape back to Anambra.
However, the team needs fuel and supplies for this mission and to do this needs immediate funds. Time is critical because the Princes is scheduled for execution because she refuses to reveal her Facebook password to the guards. The prison warden claims that they need her Facebook in order to delete the tomato sauce post. But we believe the guards only want to look at her private photos in the golden chain bikini which she only posted to her friends. As you are well aware, you should never share your Facebook password with anyone.
Unfortunately, we have been unable to locate Mr. Nakamuro and the Princess's fortune of Bitcoins are now locked on the blockchain.
I am writing to you for help in unlocking the Bitcoins, which can most easily be accomplished by an Australian man named Craig Wright. He will unlock the Bitcoins for $100,000. The considerable Bitcoin fortune is vast (probably more than you can imagine) so this is not unreasonable.
Enclosed is a cashiers check for $4,900. We are sending these to mature Christian people only because we can trust people such as yourself. Please deposit this check in your bank, and immediately withdraw $4,000 in cash. Please keep the $900 as a courtesy for your Sincere Help. Take the $4,000 cash to your Best Buy or Target store and purchase Steam Gift Cards. If the cashier asks why you are buying these cards, tell them it is gifts for a large video-game party celebrating the birthday in honor of your son who will be turning 30 and lives in the basement.
As soon as you get home from the store, REPLY to this email letter and I will quickly send you a phone number to call. You will then open the Steam Gift Cards and read the numbers on them so that we can use them for funds to pay for unlocking the Bitcoins.
I would be honored to have you by my side as we embark on this effort to save the Princess.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
God Bless,
Chroma Oloki, nephew of the Princess of Anambra
Re: (Score:2)
This pressed all the right buttons. I have no mod points, but thank you for the laugh!
It's all about trust (Score:2)
If you trust the court system, this is a Karen who tried to start a social media campaign for no reason other than to destroy a company's reputation because she didn't like something she bought from them.
If you don't trust the court system, this is someone who made the error of mouthing off in a hyperbolic manner after being pissed off at a product's misleading labelling, in a country where free speech is at the pleasure of corporate lawyers.
Fuck does not keep company with kill. (Score:2)
I just had a word with "fuck", and he said "kill" and its various forms are not in the club.
This is an annoying trend, and the fact that the summary botched the number of asterisks makes it extra annoying. It seems like it started with r*pe, which made me wonder if somebody got a rope and killed themselves. (Oh no! He said killed). IIRC, rape may have been in our elementary school dictionary; kill definitely was. THESE ARE NOT DIRTY WORDS.
Is... is it official? Did Millenials ruin swearing, or it it mo