The messenger is often the target of gendered and personal attacks. It’s so much easier than hearing uncomfortable truths
Earlier this month, the foreign affairs committee held an evidence session into the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps). Catherine Belton amended references to Roman Abramovich in her book Putin’s People after he sued her and her publisher for defamation. She had described the aggressive tactics often used by some British legal firms. Tom Burgis, author of Kleptopia – who recently had a libel case against him brought by the Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (ENRC) thrown out by a judge – said, of the way some London law firms behave: “You are cast as the most monstrous, scheming, corrupt version of yourself.”
Slapps are one of those things that nobody used to talk about, but suddenly everyone wants to talk about. In January, David Davis and Liam Byrne spoke in the Commons of the various ways journalists have been put on mute by litigation from big-money players. Byrne, on poetic form, said the journalists’ dictum of “follow the money … is now being smothered, suffocated and strangled in courts by allies, associates and friends of President Putin”. Defamation is one of four areas of law that the wealthy typically use against investigative journalists. The others are privacy, data protection and – comically – harassment. It is very hurtful to a billionaire’s feelings when people bang on and on about where their money came from, and which of their enemies mysteriously died. (Just this weekend we’ve read about how England’s legal system can have a chilling effect on journalism in the Sunday Times’ remarkable piece on the disgraced former MP Charlie Elphicke.)
Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/SMZnfH
Post a Comment