Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-21 13:23:00 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 1990994178F2965E44EC3711F4FF39E19782D705B15E92F7A6C4D1383B9D96FE
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