Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-21 18:38:33 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: D54E3CBB0BC7FC69F2CB9397DD75605588AD1CBF1ADDA14DE98FB3521DBF1532
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