MY DREAM IS TO BE XXXX

Today I received word from the Leisure Farm Resort Management about my alleged incorrect and harmful comments in THIS post. The section in question is called "16TH, CAUSEWAY CRUISIN'" and the comments/captions in question are (in bold):

" We then headed t lunch at the Horse Riding Club. -Insert photo of empty field- Which have a lack of horses apparently. -Insert photo of thatched roof- But does boast, on its coaster, the "largest thatched roof cluster" without providing details of any sort."

Now, in my media law classes I learnt that for a statement to be considered libel there are certain conditions that this aforementioned statement must fulfill. First and foremost, is that the statement has to be defamatory in meaning.
Defamatory is defined as "injurious to reputation". From my media law classes, I also know that for a statement to be Defamatory one of the conditions it has to fulfill is that a reasonable layman, a third party, would be able to understand that the comments were malicious.

Cynical derision? Maybe... Irony? Not quite... Malicious? Certainly not.

So... as a reasonable layman, please do tell me whether my comment about the "lack of horses" at the Horse Riding Club should be taken literally and seriously. If you actually DID think that this Horse Riding Club has no horses BECAUSE of what I said, then please do tell me and I will promptly apologise to Leisure Farm Resort Management for damaging their horse-filled reputation.

This brings me to my second comment. The one about the largest thatched roof cluster being not backed up by additional information on the coaster itself. Well, that is completely true and I was stating an observation, and even more than an observation, a fact.

I expect to receive another email soon. But, I have been very fair in the above paragraphs and furthermore, I again am stating facts of the matter. I'm not looking for trouble, just seeking a little bit of light.

[Disclaimer: I, Adriana Chan, am in no way qualified to practice law, media or otherwise, nor do I feel that just by taking a 6 month class on Media Law entitles me to know the ins and outs of legal matters. However, the statements I made in para 2 are perfectly true if my memory serves me right. If it does not, please do feel free to correct me. ]