When seeking to protect reputation there are different arguments available. The primary route is defamation because it is the tort that has been devised to protect reputation. Due to its longer history, defamation also stands out as the mos t recognisable. This tort has evolved more recently . It is now discussed as an action that balances reputation and free speech; where this balance is concerned in particular with f ree speech considerations that can attenuate the recourse an aggrieved individual may have in bringing a claim in defamation. The next option seems to be privacy -based. An action based upon some form of privacy is likely to be pursued where there may be a questionable defamation claim (such as, the remarks are within the growing spectrum of the defamation defences such as fair comment or responsible publication on a matter of public interest ). The nature of the privacy action is nuanced (more so than defamation with its slander and libel ele ments). There are different aspects to priva cy that are protected – though they each have varying levels of strength in the law. For example, if the aggrieved believes that information was wrongfully disclosed, an action in breach of confidence may be purs ued (in Canada this has been treated as a hybrid of tort and equity) because the information had been disclosed in a confidential setting (i.e. not for broadcast to others). Another aspect of privacy is data protection. This too is a matter of disclosure because it deals with the propriety of dissemination of data. It may also include the way in which personal data is processed.