As with other forms of defamation or libel, the important distinction among online reviews of restaurants, businesses, and other experiences is between subjective statements of opinion (“the food was terrible”) and objective statements of fact (“the restaurant is a front for organized crime”). A person is entitled to state an opinion that is different from other persons’ opinions, but is not entitled to misrepresent facts that can be proven to be true or false.

Laws vary from state to state, but many state legislatures have enacted laws that protect citizens against lawsuits designed to intimidate and silence critics speaking on matters of public interest. For more information on these laws, see the subtopic Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

In Wyoming, as in other states, the legal distinction between subjective opinions and objective statements of fact is crucial when it comes to online reviews of restaurants, businesses, and other experiences. Subjective opinions, such as 'the food was terrible,' are generally protected under the First Amendment as free speech. However, objective statements that assert facts, like 'the restaurant is a front for organized crime,' must be true to avoid potential legal action for defamation or libel. If such a statement is false and harms the reputation of the business or individual, it could lead to a defamation lawsuit. Wyoming does not have a specific anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute as of the knowledge cutoff date, which in some states provides protections for individuals speaking on matters of public interest from being unduly silenced by litigation. Therefore, individuals in Wyoming should be cautious when posting reviews to ensure that factual assertions can be substantiated, as the state's defamation laws would apply to any claims of libel or slander.