Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 23:27:37 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 8F29CDA2EC92E6A0D69DDA9DE7773F271EFCE0C9A672E6454DC6A33B756BA70C
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