The right to poke fun
Elton John's libel action against the Guardian was thrown out yesterday because the judge said the disputed article was satirical rather than factual.
John claimed that the meaning of the column A peak in the diary of... Elton John (written by Marina Hyde and published on 5 July) was that he was insincere about the Elton John Aids Foundation and that he used it for self-promotion rather than to raise money.
The meaning that matters in a libel case is what would be understood by a reasonable person in the worst case.
The High Court Judge, Mr Justice Tugendhat, ruled that words Marina Hyde used were obviously a form of teasing and that no reader would take the statements to be factual. The article (view here) is written in the voice of Elton John and is not presented as a news story.
In a statement, the Guardian said: the judgment is an important recognition of the right to poke the occasional bit of fun.
John claimed that the meaning of the column A peak in the diary of... Elton John (written by Marina Hyde and published on 5 July) was that he was insincere about the Elton John Aids Foundation and that he used it for self-promotion rather than to raise money.
The meaning that matters in a libel case is what would be understood by a reasonable person in the worst case.
The High Court Judge, Mr Justice Tugendhat, ruled that words Marina Hyde used were obviously a form of teasing and that no reader would take the statements to be factual. The article (view here) is written in the voice of Elton John and is not presented as a news story.
In a statement, the Guardian said: the judgment is an important recognition of the right to poke the occasional bit of fun.
Labels: Media law
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home