Page 123 - Courting the Media Contemporary Perspectives on Media and Law

114 Per-Anders Forstorp

support outweighs the other party‘s. This is what is referred to by using the
juridical notion ―value as evidence‖ [Walton 2008]. When a ―your words
against mine‖ situation is at hand, it means that until further proven, these
positions are taken to carry exactly the same weight and they should carry this
balanced weight until the court proceedings have decided otherwise. Such a
situation can also be the result of a different form of evaluation, namely that
the evidence brought forward is very hard to assess or compare or that it is
difficult to find criteria for evaluating these accounts in order to measure them
against each other. In legal contexts, a ―your words against mine‖ situation
most typically is at hand when the sufficient proofs and evidence are lacking
(cf. below). Perhaps most typically, this happens when the only available
evidence is the party‘s own testimony, when other means of proof such as
written evidence, external witnesses, visual documentation, technical
evidence, etc. are lacking. What remains are only the subjective words of the
contested parties, which capture the literal meaning of the expression ―your
words against mine‖.
―Your words against mine‖ is an expression used in a situation which can
be characterized by a high degree of symmetry, an issue to which we will
return in the theoretical discussion. It differs from many other situations
characterized by symmetry in the sense that a third party (e.g. the law) can
decide in favor of any of the parties. It is a paradoxical symmetry, however,
because the parties can agree that ―your words [stands] against mine‖, yet this
is based on the assumption that there is a conflict which per definition is an
asymmetry. Symmetry in the context of communication and law is generally
regarded as something valuable and as ideologically important in a state
governed by law. Such an assessment can be done in a ―your words against
mine‖ situation but the relative indeterminacy of the situation is only
temporary, until the procedure of decision and verdict starts its machinery.
This symmetry can be regarded as something valuable, because a conflict has
been established yet a certain cease fire has taken effect and some mundane
and trivial things can proceed uninterrupted. The temporary standstill can be
interpreted by the parties as a certain relative equality in the respective
arguments. Evidence that is brought forward can also be regarded as
symmetrical, although this need not be the case. A verbal cease fire can
certainly be mixed up with a draw – and sometimes this is the desired strategy.
The challenges to one‘s arguments can be regarded as temporarily eliminated.
Usually, one of the parties has something to gain on declaring an end to a
―your words against mine‖ situation. The ensuing asymmetry means that any