Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 17:10:33 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 17728731CCFCDF2DEAF9944F2BEDBF3E8B49814E878D73627FDA5A2DB529A832
Participant Details
Original Note:
Ms Cadwalladr initially claimed that what she had said about Mr Banks, which he said was defamation, was true. It was later proved untrue, which she has admitted but then claimed it was "in the public interest" to have said it anyway. The appeal court disagreed. https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/arron-banks-wins-carole-cadwalladr-libel-appeal/ https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Banks-v-Cadwalladr-130622-Judgment.pdf
All Note Details