Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 17:35:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: D4C7FE91EED5CBD482C183BC1656B394262200027B4B38C47CF94F53B2B9E934
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