Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 17:45:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 1D8A80AF0AB0D1F13DACCE399B63CBC9DC8233A04F515A362387F2B0714E8572
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