Scientists are increasingly involved in defamation claims. Sometimes they are defendants in disputes over the accuracy of articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In other instances, scientists are plaintiffs, filing suits against those who have attacked them in the popular media, harming their reputations. Both situations represent efforts to quell scientists’ speech, generally because their research threatens established commercial interests, and they pose a threat to scientific inquiry. This article examines these two trends. It recommends that, for journal articles, courts recognize a scientific debate privilege, which is emerging in some jurisdictions. It presents evidence that reputational attacks are intimidating scientists, causing them to pursue fewer controversial lines of research. It notes that, in their efforts to maintain vigorous debate on matters of public concern, courts are allowing brutal criticism of scientists that is having the opposite effect by driving researchers’ voices out of the public sphere.

科学家越来越多地参与诽谤诉讼。有时，他们是在同行评审的科学期刊上发表的文章的准确性的争端中的被告。在其他情况下，科学家是原告，对在流行媒体中袭击他们，损害其声誉的人提起诉讼。两种情况都代表了平息科学家讲话的努力，通常是因为他们的研究威胁到已确立的商业利益，并且对科学探究构成了威胁。本文研究了这两种趋势。它建议，对于期刊文章，法院应承认在某些司法管辖区正在出现的科学辩论特权。它提供了证据，证明名誉攻击正威胁着科学家，使他们从事较少争议的研究路线。它指出，