identify whether speeches delivered in a WeChat group encroach on any other person's right to reputation, it is necessary to take into consideration the characteristics of online dissemination of information and make a comprehensive judgment based on such specific factors as subject of tort, scope of dissemination and degree of damage while ensuring that all constituent elements of the traditional tort of right to reputation are met. In this case, Zhao Min denied that the relevant information involved sent by her WeChat account ID X---calm originated from her, but provided no evidence thereon, and her denial was actually at variance with the ascertained facts, so the court could not adopt the defense's opinion. In light of the circumstances ascertained through court trial, and based on the contents of the chat records on WeChat, testimony of witness, as well as materials retrieved by the court from Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., Ltd., it could be identified that after having a dispute with Huang Xiaolan, Zhao Min delivered speeches with such obviously insulting words as “silly X”, “stinky silly X”, “mental divergence” and “mad fool" in the information sent via her WeChat account ID in two WeChat groups of owners of the residential quarter where both parties concerned lived while using Huang Xiaolan's photos as illustrations, and with respect to derogatory words against Lanshida Company such as "illicit beautician", "blackmail customer", "shit instrument", and "defective technology and product", Zhao Min failed to produce evidence proving the objective authenticity of the speeches delivered by her; and to say the least, even though there were relevant facts, she should seek resolution through legal means. Zhao Min sent the above-mentioned improper speeches in two WeChat groups with many residents of the residential quarter, whose subjective fault was obvious. Judging from the membership of the WeChat groups, inquiries from other members and such characteristics as convenience, extensiveness and speediness of online dissemination of information, the speeches involved definitely were prone to lead to speculation and misunderstanding of the beauty shop operated by Huang Xiaolan and Lanshida Company, damaging the public's trust in Lanshida Company in the residential quarter, and giving rise to negative recognition of the two plaintiffs, and lowering the social evaluation of Huang Xiaolan as well as the products or services of Lanshida Company. There was a causality chain between Zhao Min's derogatory acts and damage to the reputation of Huang Xiaolan and Lanshida Company. So Zhao Min's acts which met the constitutive requirements of the tort of right to reputation had constituted a tort. 5