Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 14:53:53 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: E888878CA7B24CB8C56A6F0835E52D2185D6BDF86BB2F06F08D0833B445D4426
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