135-459: The " Dear Bill " letters were a regular feature in the British satirical magazine Private Eye , purporting to be the private correspondence of Denis Thatcher , husband of the then-Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher . It was written by Richard Ingrams and John Wells , and illustrated with sketches by George Adamson for the first five years, and subsequently by Brian Bagnall. The series took
270-443: A per se action: If the plaintiff proves that such a statement was made and was false, to recover damages the plaintiff need only prove that someone had made the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required. However, to recover full compensation a plaintiff should be prepared to prove actual damages. As with any defamation case, truth remains an absolute defence to defamation per se . This means that even if
405-412: A US lecturer. The site was listed as a source that is "purposefully fake with the intent of satire/comedy, which can offer important critical commentary on politics and society, but have the potential to be shared as actual/literal news." The Eye rejected any such classification, saying its site "contains none of these things, as the small selection of stories online are drawn from the journalism pages of
540-615: A building praised by his enemy Nikolaus Pevsner ) and carried on by his daughter Candida Lycett Green . For four decades beginning in 1978, it was edited by Gavin Stamp under the pseudonym Piloti . The column notably features a discussion of the state of public architecture and especially the preservation (or otherwise) of Britain's architectural heritage. Street of Shame is a column addressing journalistic misconduct and excesses, hypocrisy, and undue influence by proprietors and editors, mostly sourced from tipoffs —it sometimes serves as
675-447: A cartoon headstone inscribed with an extensive list of well-known names, and the epitaph : "They did not sue in vain". In the 1971 case of Arkell v Pressdram , Arkell's lawyers wrote a letter which concluded: "His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply." Private Eye responded: "We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by
810-419: A case the truth of the statements was no justification for the public and insulting manner in which they had been made, but, even in public matters, the accused had the opportunity to justify his actions by openly stating what he considered necessary for public safety to be denounced by the libel and proving his assertions to be true. The second head included defamatory statements made in private, and in this case
945-466: A child with a Christian man, and that this act was common. Following Osborne's anti-Semitic publication, several Jews were attacked. Initially, the judge seemed to believe the court could do nothing since no individual was singled out by Osborne's writings. However, the court concluded that "since the publication implied the act was one Jews frequently did, the whole community of Jews was defamed." Though various reports of this case give differing accounts of
1080-415: A comic rather than a serious magazine. Both its satire and investigative journalism have led to numerous libel suits. It is known for the use of pseudonyms by its contributors, many of whom have been prominent in public life—this even extends to a fictional proprietor, Lord Gnome. The forerunner of Private Eye was The Walopian , an underground magazine published at Shrewsbury School by pupils in
1215-799: A commoner in England was known as libel or slander, the defamation of a member of the English aristocracy was called scandalum magnatum, literally "the scandal of magnates". Following the Second World War and with the rise of contemporary international human rights law , the right to a legal remedy for defamation was included in Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which states that: This implies
1350-406: A criminal offence and provide for penalties as such. Article 19 , a British free expression advocacy group, has published global maps charting the existence of criminal defamation law across the globe, as well as showing countries that have special protections for political leaders or functionaries of the state. There can be regional statutes that may differ from the national norm. For example, in
1485-408: A defamation action typically requires that a plaintiff claiming defamation prove that the defendant: Additionally, American courts apply special rules in the case of statements made in the press concerning public figures, which can be used as a defence. While plaintiff alleging defamation in an American court must usually prove that the statement caused harm, and was made without adequate research into
SECTION 10
#17327811776471620-464: A famous trademark has been diluted through tarnishment, see generally trademark dilution , " intentional interference with contract ", and "negligent misrepresentation". In America, for example, the unique tort of false light protects plaintiffs against statements which are not technically false but are misleading. Libel and slander both require publication. Although laws vary by state; in America,
1755-462: A good long-term solution to the problems of the region." The magazine was both criticized and praised for its stance, with some accusing the magazine of antisemitism , while others called it brave for criticizing the Israeli government. Critics such as investigative journalist David Collier condemned the magazine, while supporters defended its critique as not antisemitic but a legitimate questioning of
1890-458: A humiliating or degrading manner), et cetera. "Fama" is a generic term referring to reputation and actio iniuriarum pertaining to it encompasses defamation more broadly Beyond simply covering actions that fall within the broader concept of defamation, "actio iniuriarum" relating to infringements of a person's corpus provides civil remedies for assaults, acts of a sexual or indecent nature, and 'wrongful arrest and detention'. In Scots law , which
2025-434: A libel case in an American court, the statement must have been published knowing it to be false or with reckless disregard to its truth (i.e. actual malice ). The Associated Press estimates that 95% of libel cases involving news stories do not arise from high-profile news stories, but "run of the mill" local stories like news coverage of local criminal investigations or trials, or business profiles. An early example of libel
2160-498: A long history stretching back to classical antiquity. While defamation has been recognized as an actionable wrong in various forms across historical legal systems and in various moral and religious philosophies, defamation law in contemporary legal systems can primarily be traced back to Roman and early English law. Roman law was aimed at giving sufficient scope for the discussion of a man's character, while it protected him from needless insult and pain. The remedy for verbal defamation
2295-683: A more confrontational way. As well as many one-off cartoons, Private Eye features several regular comic strips: Some of the magazine's former cartoon strips include: At various times, Private Eye has also used the work of Ralph Steadman , Wally Fawkes , Timothy Birdsall , Martin Honeysett , Willie Rushton , Gerald Scarfe , Robert Thompson, Ken Pyne , Geoff Thompson, "Jorodo", Ed McLachlan , Simon Pearsall, Kevin Woodcock , Brian Bagnall, Kathryn Lamb and George Adamson . Private Eye has, from time to time, produced various spin-offs from
2430-406: A partial victory and eventually settled with the magazine. The case threatened to bankrupt Private Eye , which turned to its readers for financial support in the form of a "Goldenballs Fund". Goldsmith was referred to as "Jaws". Goldsmith's solicitor Peter Carter-Ruck was involved in many litigation cases against Private Eye; the magazine refers to his firm as "Carter-Fuck". Robert Maxwell won
2565-466: A person that is included in a personal database and that one knows to be false, is punished with six months to three years in prison. When there is harm to somebody, penalties are aggravated by an extra half (Article 117 bis, §§ 2nd and 3rd). Defamation law in Australia developed primarily out of the English law of defamation and its cases, though now there are differences introduced by statute and by
2700-574: A provably false factual connotation. Subsequent state and federal cases have addressed defamation law and the Internet. American defamation law is much less plaintiff-friendly than its counterparts in European and the Commonwealth countries . A comprehensive discussion of what is and is not libel or slander under American law is difficult, as the definition differs between different states and
2835-634: A right to legal protection against defamation; however, this right co-exists with the right to freedom of opinion and expression under Article 19 of the ICCPR as well as Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . Article 19 of the ICCPR expressly provides that the right to freedom of opinion and expression may be limited so far as it is necessary "for respect of the rights or reputations of others". Consequently, international human rights law provides that while individuals should have
SECTION 20
#17327811776472970-520: A series of collections were published: Private Eye Private Eye is a British fortnightly satirical and current affairs news magazine, founded in 1961. It is published in London and has been edited by Ian Hislop since 1986. The publication is widely recognised for its prominent criticism and lampooning of public figures. It is also known for its in-depth investigative journalism into under-reported scandals and cover-ups. Private Eye
3105-491: A significant sum from the magazine when he sued over their suggestion that he looked like a criminal. Hislop claimed that his summary of the case: "I've just given a fat cheque to a fat Czech" was the only example of a joke being told on News at Ten . Sonia Sutcliffe , wife of the "Yorkshire Ripper" Peter Sutcliffe , sued over allegations in January 1981 that she had used her connection to her husband to make money. Outside
3240-521: A special "subscription cancellation coupon" for disgruntled readers to send in) and the Soham murders of 2002 all attracted similar complaints. Following the 7/7 London bombings the magazine's cover (issue number 1137) featured Prime Minister Tony Blair saying to London mayor Ken Livingstone : "We must track down the evil mastermind behind the bombers...", to which Livingstone replies: "...and invite him around for tea", about his controversial invitation of
3375-430: A statement, even if truthful, intended to harm the claimant out of malice; some have a separate tort or delict of " invasion of privacy " in which the making of a true statement may give rise to liability: but neither of these comes under the general heading of "defamation". The tort of harassment created by Singapore's Protection from Harassment Act 2014 is an example of a tort of this type being created by statute. There
3510-664: A venue for the settling of scores within the trade, and is a source of friction with editors. This work formed the basis of much of Ian Hislop's testimony to the Leveson Inquiry , and Leveson was complimentary about the magazine and the column. The term street of shame is a reference to Fleet Street, the former centre of British journalism, and has become synonymous with it. The Rotten Boroughs column focuses on actual or alleged wrongdoing in local or regional governments and elections, for example, corruption, nepotism, hypocrisy and incompetence. The column's name derives from
3645-503: Is 'little historical basis in Scots law for the kind of structural difficulties that have restricted English law' in the development of mechanisms to protect so-called 'rights of personality'. The actio iniuriarum heritage of Scots law gives the courts scope to recognise, and afford reparation in, cases in which no patrimonial (or 'quasi-patrimonial') 'loss' has occurred, but a recognised dignitary interest has nonetheless been invaded through
3780-471: Is 40,000 ALL to three million ALL (c. $ 25 100 ). In addition, defamation of authorities, public officials or foreign representatives (Articles 227, 239 to 241) are separate crimes with maximum penalties varying from one to three years of imprisonment. In Argentina , the crimes of calumny and injury are foreseen in the chapter "Crimes Against Honor" (Articles 109 to 117-bis) of the Penal Code. Calumny
3915-644: Is Britain's best-selling current affairs news magazine , and such is its long-term popularity and impact that many of its recurring in-jokes have entered popular culture in the United Kingdom. The magazine bucks the trend of declining circulation for print media, having recorded its highest-ever circulation in the second half of 2016. It is privately owned and highly profitable. With a "deeply conservative resistance to change", it has resisted moves to online content or glossy format: it has always been printed on cheap paper and resembles, in format and content,
4050-417: Is also, in almost all jurisdictions, a tort or delict of " misrepresentation ", involving the making of a statement that is untrue even though not defamatory. Thus a surveyor who states a house is free from risk of flooding has not defamed anyone, but may still be liable to someone who purchases the house relying on this statement. Other increasingly common claims similar to defamation in U.S. law are claims that
4185-566: Is clear and accessible to everyone", 2) "proven to be necessary and legitimate to protect the rights or reputations of others", and 3) "proportionate and the least restrictive to achieve the purported aim". This test is analogous to the Oakes Test applied domestically by the Supreme Court of Canada in assessing whether limitations on constitutional rights are "demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society" under Section 1 of
Dear Bill - Misplaced Pages Continue
4320-431: Is closely related to Roman Dutch law, the remedy for defamation is similarly the actio iniuriarium and the most common defence is "veritas" (i.e. proving the truth of otherwise defamatory statement). Defamation falls within the realm of non-patrimonial (i.e. dignitary) interests. The Scots law pertaining to the protection of non-patrimonial interests is said to be 'a thing of shreds and patches'. This notwithstanding, there
4455-526: Is dangerous in that it is likely to be read by people who are concerned about the safety of the vaccine. A doubting parent who reads this might be convinced there is a genuine problem, and the absence of any proper references will prevent them from checking the many misleading statements." In a review article published in 2010, after Wakefield was disciplined by the General Medical Council , regular columnist Phil Hammond , who contributes to
4590-544: Is defined as "the false imputation to a determined person of a concrete crime that leads to a lawsuit" (Article 109). However, expressions referring to subjects of public interest or that are not assertive do not constitute calumny. Penalty is a fine from 3,000 to 30,000 pesos . He who intentionally dishonor or discredit a determined person is punished with a penalty from 1,500 to 20,000 pesos (Article 110). He who publishes or reproduces, by any means, calumnies and injuries made by others, will be punished as responsible himself for
4725-574: Is further affected by federal law. Some states codify what constitutes slander and libel together, merging the concepts into a single defamation law. New Zealand received English law with the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in February 1840. The current Act is the Defamation Act 1992 which came into force on 1 February 1993 and repealed the Defamation Act 1954 . New Zealand law allows for
4860-617: Is likely that Indian courts would treat this principle as persuasive precedent. Recently, incidents of defamation in relation to public figures have attracted public attention. The origins of U.S. defamation law pre-date the American Revolution . Though the First Amendment of the American Constitution was designed to protect freedom of the press, it was primarily envisioned to prevent censorship by
4995-764: Is more controversial as it involves the state expressly seeking to restrict freedom of expression . Human rights organisations, and other organisations such as the Council of Europe and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe , have campaigned against strict defamation laws that criminalise defamation. The freedom of expression advocacy group Article 19 opposes criminal defamation, arguing that civil defamation laws providing defences for statements on matters of public interest are better compliant with international human rights law. The European Court of Human Rights has placed restrictions on criminal libel laws because of
5130-552: Is no need to prove that specific damage or loss has occurred. However, Section 6 of the Act allows for a defamation action brought by a corporate body to proceed only when the body corporate alleges and proves that the publication of the defamation has caused or is likely to cause pecuniary loss to that body corporate. As is the case for most Commonwealth jurisdictions, Canada follows English law on defamation issues (except in Quebec where
5265-401: Is not defamation. While defamation torts are broadly similar across common law jurisdictions; differences have arisen as a result of diverging case law, statutes and other legislative action, and constitutional concerns specific to individual jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have a separate tort or delict of injury , intentional infliction of emotional distress , involving the making of
5400-409: Is often purchased by publishers and journalists to cover potential damage awards from libel lawsuits. Roughly 3/4 of all money spent on claims by liability insurers goes to lawyers and only 1/4 goes to settlements or judgments, according to one estimate from Michelle Worrall Tilton of Media Risk Consultants. Some advise buying worldwide coverage that offers defense against cases regardless of where in
5535-552: Is one of the most sued people in Britain. From 1969 to the mid-1980s, the magazine was represented by human rights lawyer Geoffrey Bindman . The writer Colin Watson was the first person to successfully sue Private Eye , objecting to being described as "the little-known author who ... was writing a novel, very Wodehouse but without jokes". He was awarded £750. The cover of the tenth-anniversary issue in 1971 (number 257) showed
Dear Bill - Misplaced Pages Continue
5670-461: Is that of truth. Proving the truth of an allegedly defamatory statement is always a valid defence. Where a statement is partially true, certain jurisdictions in the Commonwealth have provided by statute that the defence "shall not fail by reason only that the truth of every charge is not proved if the words not proved to be true do not materially injure the claimant's reputation having regard to
5805-509: Is the case of John Peter Zenger in 1735. Zenger was hired to publish the New York Weekly Journal . When he printed another man's article criticising William Cosby , the royal governor of Colonial New York , Zenger was accused of seditious libel . The verdict was returned as not guilty on the charge of seditious libel, because it was proven that all the statements Zenger had published about Cosby had been true, so there
5940-492: Is typically regarded as a tort for which the offended party can take civil action . The range of remedies available to successful plaintiffs in defamation cases varies between jurisdictions and range from damages to court orders requiring the defendant to retract the offending statement or to publish a correction or an apology. Modern defamation in common law jurisdictions are historically derived from English defamation law . English law allows actions for libel to be brought in
6075-528: The California Code of Civil Procedure and Ontario's Protection of Public Participation Act do so by enabling defendants to make a special motion to strike or dismiss during which discovery is suspended and which, if successful, would terminate the lawsuit and allow the party to recover its legal costs from the plaintiff. There are a variety of defences to defamation claims in common law jurisdictions. The two most fundamental defences arise from
6210-577: The Dear Bill column, mocking Thatcher as an amiable, golf-playing drunk. The column was collected in a series of books and became a stage play ("Anyone for Denis?") in which Wells played the fictional Denis, a character now inextricably "blurred with the real historical figure", according to Ingrams. In The Back is an investigative journalism section notably associated with journalist Paul Foot (the Eye has always published its investigative journalism at
6345-653: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , the " necessary in a democratic society " test applied by the European Court of Human Rights in assessing limitations on rights under the ECHR, Section 36 of the post- Apartheid Constitution of South Africa , and Section 24 of the 2010 Constitution of Kenya. Nevertheless, the worldwide use of criminal and civil defamation , to censor, intimidate or silence critics, has been increasing in recent years. In 2011,
6480-444: The Commonwealth of Independent States , America, and Canada. Questions of group libel have been appearing in common law for hundreds of years. One of the earliest known cases of a defendant being tried for defamation of a group was the case of R v Orme and Nutt (1700). In this case, the jury found that the defendant was guilty of libeling several subjects, though they did not specifically identify who these subjects were. A report of
6615-599: The Rotten Borough column "at least 13 times" described him as corrupt and claimed he used "the race card " to avoid criticism. A victory for the magazine came in late 2001 when a libel case brought by Cornish chartered accountant John Stuart Condliffe was dropped after six weeks with an out-of-court settlement in which Condliffe paid £100,000 towards the Eye 's defence. Writing in The Guardian , Jessica Hodgson noted, "The victory against Condliffe—who
6750-460: The Supreme Court of Canada rejected the actual malice test adopted in the US case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan . Once a claim has been made, the defendant may avail themselves of a defence of justification (the truth), fair comment, responsible communication, or privilege. Publishers of defamatory comments may also use the defence of innocent dissemination where they had no knowledge of the nature of
6885-595: The United Nations Human Rights Committee published their General comment No. 34 (CCPR/C/GC/34) – regarding Article 19 of the ICCPR. Paragraph 47 states: Defamation laws must be crafted with care to ensure that they comply with paragraph 3 [of Article 19 of the ICCPR], and that they do not serve, in practice, to stifle freedom of expression. All such laws, in particular penal defamation laws, should include such defences as
SECTION 50
#17327811776477020-401: The defence of truth and they should not be applied with regard to those forms of expression that are not, of their nature, subject to verification. At least with regard to comments about public figures , consideration should be given to avoiding penalizing or otherwise rendering unlawful untrue statements that have been published in error but without malice. In any event, a public interest in
7155-459: The "Dirty Digger". Queen Elizabeth II and King Charles III are known as "Brenda" and "Brian" respectively, names that originated with palace servants. The first half of each issue, which consists chiefly of news reporting and investigative journalism , tends to include these in-jokes more subtly, to maintain journalistic integrity, while the second half, generally characterised by unrestrained parody and cutting humour, tends to present itself in
7290-620: The "Medicine Balls" column under the pseudonym "MD", stated that: " Private Eye got it wrong in its coverage of MMR" in maintaining its support for Wakefield's position long after shortcomings in his work had emerged. Senior figures in the trade union movement have accused the publication of having a classist anti-union bias, with Unite chief of staff Andrew Murray describing Private Eye as "a publication of assiduous public school boys" and adding that it has "never once written anything about trade unions that isn't informed by cynicism and hostility". The Socialist Worker also wrote that "For
7425-458: The "Signal Failures" column about the railways. Stories sometimes originate from writers for more mainstream publications who cannot get their stories published by their main employers. Private Eye has traditionally lagged other magazines in adopting new typesetting and printing technologies. At the start, it was laid out with scissors and paste and typed on three IBM Electric typewriters— italics , pica and elite —lending an amateurish look to
7560-539: The "Street of Shame" column, named after Fleet Street , the former home of many papers. It reports on parliamentary and national political issues, with regional and local politics covered in equal depth under the "Rotten Boroughs" column (named after the rotten boroughs of the pre- Reform Act of 1832 House of Commons). Extensive investigative journalism is published under the "In the Back" section, often tackling cover-ups and unreported scandals. A financial column called "In
7695-414: The 18th-century rotten boroughs . There are also several recurring miniature sections . The magazine has occasionally published special editions dedicated to the reporting of particular events, such as government inadequacy over the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak , the conviction in 2001 of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing (an incident regularly covered since by "In the Back"), and
7830-554: The British public. They played a major part in fashioning Denis Thatcher's popular public image. Bill Deedes, along with the Thatchers' daughter Carol , argued that Denis himself played up to this image – by encouraging the portrayal of himself as a harmlessly incompetent buffoon, he could deflect any claims that he was manipulating government from "behind the throne". In addition to being published fortnightly in Private Eye ,
7965-565: The City" (referring to the City of London ), written by Michael Gillard under the pseudonym "Slicker", has exposed several significant financial scandals and described unethical business practices. Some contributors to Private Eye are media figures or specialists in their field who write anonymously, often under humorous pseudonyms, such as "Dr B Ching" (a reference to the Beeching cuts ) who writes
8100-483: The Dutch Caribbean) gives rise to a claim by way of " actio iniuriarum ". For liability under the actio iniuriarum , the general elements of delict must be present, but specific rules have been developed for each element. Causation, for example, is seldom in issue, and is assumed to be present. The elements of liability under the actio iniuriarum are as follows: Under the actio iniuriarum , harm consists in
8235-600: The English-speaking world, the law of defamation traditionally distinguishes between libel (written, printed, posted online, published in mass media) and slander (oral speech). It is treated as a civil wrong ( tort , delict ), as a criminal offence , or both. Defamation and related laws can encompass a variety of acts (from general defamation and insult – as applicable to every citizen – to specialized provisions covering specific entities and social structures): Defamation law has
SECTION 60
#17327811776478370-531: The High Court for any published statements alleged to defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals (under English law companies are legal persons, and allowed to bring suit for defamation ) in a manner that causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of them. In contemporary common law jurisdictions, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and must have been made to someone other than
8505-693: The Islamic theologian Yusuf al-Qaradawi to London. During the early 2000s Private Eye published many stories on the MMR vaccine controversy , supporting the interpretation by Andrew Wakefield of published research in The Lancet by the Royal Free Hospital 's Inflammatory Bowel Disease Study Group, which described an apparent link between the vaccine and autism and bowel problems. Many of these stories accused medical researchers who supported
8640-533: The United States, criminal defamation is generally limited to the living. However, there are 7 states ( Idaho , Kansas , Louisiana , Nevada , North Dakota , Oklahoma , Utah ) that have criminal statutes regarding defamation of the dead. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has also published a detailed database on criminal and civil defamation provisions in 55 countries, including all European countries, all member countries of
8775-640: The back of the magazine). Private Eye was one of the journalistic organisations involved in sifting and analysing the Paradise Papers , and this commentary appears in In the Back . Nooks and Corners (originally Nooks and Corners of the New Barbarism ), an architectural column severely critical of architectural vandalism and "barbarism", notably modernism and brutalism , was originally founded by John Betjeman in 1971 (his first article attacked
8910-435: The calumnies and injuries whenever its content is not correctly attributed to the corresponding source. Exceptions are expressions referring to subjects of public interest or that are not assertive (see Article 113). When calumny or injury are committed through the press, a possible extra penalty is the publication of the judicial decision at the expenses of the guilty (Article 114). He who passes to someone else information about
9045-412: The case told that the jury believed that "where a writing ... inveighs against mankind in general, or against a particular order of men, as for instance, men of the gown, this is no libel, but it must descend to particulars and individuals to make it libel." This jury believed that only individuals who believed they were specifically defamed had a claim to a libel case. Since the jury was unable to identify
9180-446: The column "True Stories", featuring cuttings from the national press. The gossip columnist Nigel Dempster wrote extensively for the magazine before he fell out with Ian Hislop and other writers, while Foot wrote on politics, local government and corruption. The receptionist and general factotum from 1984 to 2014 was Hilary Lowinger . Ingrams continued as editor until 1986 when he was succeeded by Hislop. Ingrams remains chairman of
9315-489: The columns of the Daily Mail . It is the anti-establishment journal of the establishment." The 2004 Christmas issue received many complaints after it featured Pieter Bruegel 's painting of a nativity scene , in which one wise man said to another: "Apparently, it's David Blunkett 's" (who at the time was involved in a scandal in which he was thought to have impregnated a married woman). Many readers sent letters accusing
9450-606: The country by elevating the fault element for public officials to actual malice – that is, public figures could win a libel suit only if they could demonstrate the publisher's "knowledge that the information was false" or that the information was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not". Later the Supreme Court held that statements that are so ridiculous to be clearly not true are protected from libel claims, as are statements of opinion relating to matters of public concern that do not contain
9585-626: The court in May 1989, Hislop quipped about the then-record award of £600,000 in damages: "If that's justice then I'm a banana." The sum was reduced on appeal to £60,000. Readers raised a considerable sum in the "Bananaballs Fund", and Private Eye donated the surplus to the families of Peter Sutcliffe's victims. In Sonia Sutcliffe's 1990 libel case against the News of the World , it emerged that she had indeed benefited financially from her husband's crimes, although
9720-539: The crime, this report clearly shows a ruling based on group libel. Since laws restricting libel were accepted at this time because of its tendency to lead to a breach of peace, group libel laws were justified because they showed potential for an equal or perhaps greater risk of violence. For this reason, group libel cases are criminal even though most libel cases are civil torts. In a variety of Common Law jurisdictions, criminal laws prohibiting protests at funerals, sedition , false statements in connection with elections, and
9855-471: The criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty. It is impermissible for a State party to indict a person for criminal defamation but then not to proceed to trial expeditiously – such a practice has a chilling effect that may unduly restrict the exercise of freedom of expression of the person concerned and others. While each legal tradition approaches defamation differently, it
9990-474: The defences of absolute and qualified privilege, fair comment, and justification. While statutory law in the United Kingdom provides that, if the defendant is only successful in proving the truth of some of the several charges against him, the defence of justification might still be available if the charges not proved do not materially injure the reputation, there is no corresponding provision in India, though it
10125-524: The details of Private Eye ' s article had been inaccurate. In 1994, retired police inspector Gordon Anglesea successfully sued the Eye and three other media outlets for libel over allegations that he had indecently assaulted under-aged boys in Wrexham in the 1980s. In October 2016, he was convicted of historic sex offences. Hislop said the magazine would not attempt to recover the £80,000 damages awarded to Anglesea, stating: "I can't help thinking of
10260-421: The doctrine in common law jurisdictions that only a false statement of fact (as opposed to opinion) can be defamatory. This doctrine gives rise to two separate but related defences: opinion and truth. Statements of opinion cannot be regarded as defamatory as they are inherently non-falsifiable. Where a statement has been shown to be one of fact rather than opinion, the most common defence in common law jurisdictions
10395-490: The exact people who were being defamed, there was no cause to identify the statements were a libel. Another early English group libel which has been frequently cited is King v. Osborne (1732). In this case, the defendant was on trial "for printing a libel reflecting upon the Portuguese Jews". The printing in question claimed that Jews who had arrived in London from Portugal burned a Jewish woman to death when she had
10530-430: The first few decades of the twenty first century, the phenomenon of strategic lawsuits against public participation has gained prominence in many common law jurisdictions outside Singapore as activists, journalists, and critics of corporations, political leaders, and public figures are increasingly targeted with vexatious defamation litigation. As a result, tort reform measures have been enacted in various jurisdictions;
10665-509: The first satirical nightclub in London—purchased Private Eye in 1962, together with Nicholas Luard , and was a long-time contributor. Others essential to the development of the magazine were Auberon Waugh , Claud Cockburn (who had run a pre-war scandal sheet, The Week ), Barry Fantoni , Gerald Scarfe , Tony Rushton, Patrick Marnham and Candida Betjeman . Christopher Logue was another long-time contributor, providing
10800-403: The following issue's cover —a cartoon depicting Santa 's sleigh shredded by a wind farm : one said: "To use a picture of Our Lord Father Christmas and his Holy Reindeer being torn limb from limb while flying over a windfarm is inappropriate and blasphemous." In November 2016, Private Eye 's official website appeared on a list of over 150 "fake news" websites compiled by Melissa Zimdars,
10935-402: The following remedies in an action for defamation: compensatory damages; an injunction to stop further publication; a correction or a retraction; and in certain cases, punitive damages. Section 28 of the Act allows for punitive damages only when a there is a flagrant disregard of the rights of the person defamed. As the law assumes that an individual suffers loss if a statement is defamatory, there
11070-437: The form of fortnightly letters to "Bill" by his friend and golfing partner "Denis". The letters were split equally between reactionary grumblings about the state of the country and vituperative comments on contemporary politics, with regular passing references to the goings-on of a fictional collection of acquaintances and the consumption of a quite remarkable quantity of "electric soup" . "Bill", whilst never identified as such in
11205-533: The freedom of expression provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. One notable case was Lingens v. Austria (1986). According to the Criminal Code of Albania , defamation is a crime. Slandering in the knowledge of falsity is subject to fines of from 40 000 ALL (c. $ 350) to one million ALL (c. $ 8350 ). If the slandering occurs in public or damages multiple people, the fine
11340-511: The holding company. Private Eye often reports on the misdeeds of powerful and important individuals and, consequently, has received numerous libel writs throughout its history. These include three issued by James Goldsmith (known in the magazine as "(Sir) Jammy Fishpaste" and "Jonah Jammy fingers") and several by Robert Maxwell (known as "Captain Bob"), one of which resulted in the award of costs and reported damages of £225,000, and attacks on
11475-498: The infringement of a personality right, either "corpus", "dignitas", or "fama". Dignitas is a generic term meaning 'worthiness, dignity, self-respect', and comprises related concerns like mental tranquillity and privacy. Because it is such a wide concept, its infringement must be serious. Not every insult is humiliating; one must prove contumelia . This includes insult ( iniuria in the narrow sense), adultery, loss of consortium, alienation of affection, breach of promise (but only in
11610-464: The letters may not have represented the real Denis Thatcher, they represented the Denis Thatcher their readers believed in. The poet Philip Larkin described the letters as consolidating "an imaginative reality that is more convincing than the morning papers" in an Observer review, and John Wells once argued that he had done more than every Downing Street publicist to endear the Thatchers to
11745-474: The like, then it is slander. In contrast, libel encompasses defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than spoken words or gestures. The law of libel originated in the 17th century in England. With the growth of publication came the growth of libel and development of the tort of libel. The highest award in an American defamation case, at US$ 222.7 million was rendered in 1997 against Dow Jones in favour of MMAR Group Inc; however,
11880-491: The magazine by Maxwell through a book, Malice in Wonderland , and a one-off magazine, Not Private Eye . Its defenders point out that it often carries news that the mainstream press will not print for fear of legal reprisals or because the material is of minority interest. As well as covering a wide range of current affairs, Private Eye is also known for highlighting the errors and hypocritical behaviour of newspapers in
12015-414: The magazine for many years. They include euphemisms designed to avoid the notoriously plaintiff-friendly English libel laws, such as replacing the word "drunk" with " tired and emotional ", or using the phrase "Ugandan discussions" to denote illicit sexual exploits; and more obvious parodies using easily recognisable stereotypes, such as the lampooning of Conservative MPs as " Sir Bufton Tufton ". Some of
12150-467: The magazine of blasphemy and anti-Christian attitudes. One stated that the "witless, gutless buggers wouldn't dare mock Islam ". It has, however, regularly published Islam-related humour such as the cartoon which portrayed a "Taliban careers master asking a pupil: What would you like to be when you blow up?". Many letters in the first issue of 2005 disagreed with the former readers' complaints, and some were parodies of those letters, "complaining" about
12285-658: The magazine", adding that "even US college students might recognise that the Headmistress's letter is not really from a troubled high school". Zimdars later removed the website from her list, after the Eye had contacted her for clarification. In 2023, Private Eye published a satirical cover on the Israel–Hamas war , reading "This magazine may contain some criticism of the Israeli government and may suggest that killing everyone in Gaza as revenge for Hamas atrocities may not be
12420-414: The magazine, including: Some have found the magazine's irreverence and sometimes controversial humour offensive. Following the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, Private Eye printed a cover headed "Media to blame". Under this headline was a picture of many hundreds of people outside Buckingham Palace , with one person commenting that the papers were "a disgrace", another agreeing, saying that it
12555-481: The magazine. In 1976 James Goldsmith brought criminal libel charges against the magazine, meaning that if found guilty, editor Richard Ingrams and the author of the article, Patrick Marnham , could be imprisoned. He sued over allegations that he had conspired with the Clermont Set to assist Lord Lucan to evade the police, who wanted him in connection with the murder of his children's nanny. Goldsmith won
12690-423: The mid-1950s and edited by Richard Ingrams , Willie Rushton , Christopher Booker and Paul Foot . The Walopian (a play on the school magazine name The Salopian ) mocked school spirit, traditions and the masters. After National Service , Ingrams and Foot went as undergraduates to Oxford University , where they met future collaborators including Peter Usborne , Andrew Osmond and John Wells . The magazine
12825-470: The nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off." The plaintiff withdrew the threatened lawsuit. The magazine has since used this exchange as a euphemism for a blunt and coarse dismissal, i.e.: "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram ". As with " tired and emotional " this usage has spread beyond
12960-514: The offence was constituted by the unnecessary act of shouting. According to Ulpian , not all shouting was actionable. Drawing on the argument of Labeo , he asserted that the offence consisted in shouting contrary to the morals of the city (" adversus bonos mores huius civitatis ") something apt to bring in disrepute or contempt (" quae... ad infamiam vel invidiam alicuius spectaret ") the person exposed thereto. Any act apt to bring another person into disrepute gave rise to an actio injurarum . In such
13095-403: The offense lay in the content of the imputation, not in the manner of its publication. The truth was therefore a sufficient defense, for no man had a right to demand legal protection for a false reputation. In Anglo-Saxon England , whose legal tradition is the predecessor of contemporary common law jurisdictions, slander was punished by cutting out the tongue. Historically, while defamation of
13230-406: The pages. For some years after layout tools became available the magazine retained this technique to maintain its look, although the three older typewriters were replaced with an IBM composer. Today the magazine is still predominantly in black and white (though the cover and some cartoons inside appear in colour) and there is more text and less white space than is typical for a modern magazine. Much of
13365-432: The past 50 years, the satirical magazine Private Eye has upset and enraged the powerful. Its mix of humour and investigation has tirelessly challenged the hypocrisy of the elite. ... But it also has serious weaknesses. Among the witty—if sometimes tired—spoof articles and cartoons, there is a nasty streak of snobbery and prejudice. Its jokes about the poor, women and young people rely on lazy stereotypes you might expect from
13500-433: The person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander , and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel . The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, such as spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures or
13635-448: The private law is derived from French civil law). In common law provinces and territories, defamation covers any communication that tends to lower the esteem of the subject in the minds of ordinary members of the public. Probably true statements are not excluded, nor are political opinions. Intent is always presumed, and it is not necessary to prove that the defendant intended to defame. In Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto (1995),
13770-661: The proportionality of Israel's response. Ian Hislop is listed in the Guinness Book of Records as the most sued man in English legal history. Private Eye has long been known for attracting libel lawsuits which, in English law , can easily lead to the award of damages. The publication "sets aside almost a quarter of its turnover for paying out in libel defeats" although the magazine frequently finds other ways to defuse legal tensions, such as by printing letters from aggrieved parties. As editor since 1986, Ian Hislop
13905-730: The publication of defamatory books and writings, the libri or libelli famosi , from which is derived the modern use of the word libel ; and under the later emperors the latter term came to be specially applied to anonymous accusations or pasquils , the dissemination of which was regarded as particularly dangerous, and visited with very severe punishment, whether the matters contained in them were true or false. The Praetorian Edict, codified circa AD 130, declared that an action could be brought up for shouting at someone contrary to good morals: " qui, adversus bonos mores convicium cui fecisse cuiusve opera factum esse dicitur, quo adversus bonos mores convicium fieret, in eum iudicium dabo. " In this case,
14040-610: The purported MMR vaccine controversy (since shown to be medical fraud committed by Andrew Wakefield ) in 2002. A special issue was published in 2004 to mark the death of long-time contributor Paul Foot . In 2005, The Guardian and Private Eye established the Paul Foot Award (referred to colloquially as the "Footy"), with an annual £10,000 prize fund, for investigative/campaigning journalism in memory of Foot. The magazine has many recurring in-jokes and convoluted references, often comprehensible only to those who have read
14175-505: The reputation or rights of others. Additionally, restrictions of freedom of expression and other rights guaranteed by international human rights laws (including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)) and by the constitutions of a variety of countries are subject to some variation of the three-part test recognised by the United Nations Human Rights Committee which requires that limitations be: 1) "provided by law that
14310-458: The right to a legal remedy for defamation, this right must be balanced with the equally protected right to freedom of opinion and expression. In general, ensuring that domestic defamation law adequately balances individuals' right to protect their reputation with freedom of expression and of the press entails: In most of Europe, article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights permits restrictions on freedom of speech when necessary to protect
14445-474: The series, was often taken as being Denis Thatcher's close friend Bill Deedes ; Deedes later titled his autobiography Dear Bill: a memoir . The series ran throughout the Thatcher government, first appearing two weeks after Margaret Thatcher was elected. It spawned a number of annual editions of the collected letters, one for each year, and even a stage play, Anyone for Denis? , with creator John Wells playing
14580-537: The shelves of some newsagents. These included WHSmith , which had previously refused to stock Private Eye until well into the 1970s and was characterised in the magazine as "WH Smugg" or "WH Smut" on account of its policy of stocking pornographic magazines. The issues that followed the Ladbroke Grove rail crash in 1999 (number 987), the September 11 attacks of 2001 (number 1037; the magazine even included
14715-490: The state rather than defamation suits; thus, for most of American history, the Supreme Court did not interpret the First Amendment as applying to libel cases involving media defendants. This left libel laws, based upon the traditional common law of defamation inherited from the English legal system, mixed across the states. The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan dramatically altered the nature of libel law in
14850-533: The statement is true or is a statement of fact, it does not actually harm someone's reputation. It is also necessary in these cases to show that there is a well-founded public interest in the specific information being widely known, and this may be the case even for public figures . Public interest is generally not "what the public is interested in", but rather "what is in the interest of the public". Other defences recognised in one or more common law jurisdictions include: Media liability or defamation insurance
14985-451: The statement was defamatory. In an action for defamation per se , the law recognises that certain false statements are so damaging that they create a presumption of injury to the plaintiff's reputation, allowing a defamation case to proceed to verdict with no actual proof of damages. Although laws vary by state, and not all jurisdictions recognise defamation per se , there are four general categories of false statement that typically support
15120-498: The statement would be considered defamatory per se if false, if the defendant establishes that it is in fact true, an action for defamation per se cannot survive. The conception of what type of allegation may support an action for defamation per se can evolve with public policy. For example, in May 2012 an appeals court in New York, citing changes in public policy with regard to homosexuality , ruled that describing someone as gay
15255-399: The statement, it was not brought to their attention, and they were not negligent. Common law jurisdictions vary as to whether they permit corporate plaintiffs in defamation actions. Under contemporary Australian law, private corporations are denied the right to sue for defamation, with an exception for small businesses (corporations with less than 10 employees and no subsidiaries); this rule
15390-417: The subject matter of the criticism should be recognized as a defence. Care should be taken by States parties to avoid excessively punitive measures and penalties. Where relevant, States parties should place reasonable limits on the requirement for a defendant to reimburse the expenses of the successful party. States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation and, in any case, the application of
15525-569: The terms have fallen into disuse when their hidden meanings have become better known. The magazine often deliberately misspells the names of certain organisations, such as "Crapita" for the outsourcing company Capita , "Carter-Fuck" for the law firm Carter-Ruck , and " The Grauniad " for The Guardian (the latter a reference to the newspaper's frequent typos in its days as The Manchester Guardian ). Certain individuals may be referred to by another name, for example, Piers Morgan as "Piers Moron", Richard Branson as "Beardie", and Rupert Murdoch as
15660-518: The text is printed in the standard Times New Roman font. The former "Colour Section" was printed in black and white like the rest of the magazine: only the content was colourful. A series of parody columns referring to the Prime Minister of the day has been a long-term feature of Private Eye . While satirical, during the 1980s, Ingrams and John Wells wrote an affectionate series of fictional letters from Denis Thatcher to Bill Deedes in
15795-524: The title role. A television adaptation by Thames Television was broadcast in 1982. The concept of writing satire from the point of view of a Prime Ministerial spouse was not new to the magazine, who had published Mrs Wilson's Diary (also a collaboration between Wells and Ingrams) along the same line during the Wilson government. It allowed the writers wide rein to comment on the personal peculiarities of senior politicians without seeming overly absurd, and
15930-459: The truth of the remaining charges". Similarly, the American doctrine of substantial truth provides that a statement is not defamatory if it has "slight inaccuracies of expression" but is otherwise true. Since a statement can only be defamatory if it harms another person's reputation, another defence tied to the ability of a statement to be defamatory is to demonstrate that, regardless of whether
16065-413: The truthfulness of the statement; where the plaintiff is a celebrity or public official, they must additionally prove that the statement was made with actual malice (i.e. the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth). A series of court rulings led by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan , 376 U.S. 254 (1964) established that for a public official (or other legitimate public figure) to win
16200-543: The use of profanity in public, are also often used in contexts similar to criminal libel actions. The boundaries of a court's power to hold individuals in "contempt of court" for what amounts to alleged defamatory statements about judges or the court process by attorneys or other people involved in court cases is also not well established in many common law countries. While defamation torts are less controversial as they ostensibly involve plaintiffs seeking to protect their right to dignity and their reputation, criminal defamation
16335-461: The vaccine's safety of having conflicts of interest because of funding from the pharmaceutical industry. Initially dismissive of Wakefield, the magazine rapidly moved to support him, in 2002 publishing a 32-page MMR Special Report that supported Wakefield's assertion that MMR vaccines "should be given individually at not less than one-year intervals." The British Medical Journal issued a contemporary press release that concluded: "The Eye report
16470-607: The verdict was dismissed in 1999 amid allegations that MMAR failed to disclose audiotapes made by its employees. In common law jurisdictions, civil lawsuits alleging defamation have frequently been used by both private businesses and governments to suppress and censor criticism. A notable example of such lawsuits being used to suppress political criticism of a government is the use of defamation claims by politicians in Singapore's ruling People's Action Party to harass and suppress opposition leaders such as J. B. Jeyaretnam . Over
16605-528: The witnesses who came forward to assist our case at the time, one of whom later committed suicide telling his wife that he never got over not being believed. Private Eye will not be looking to get our money back from the libel damages. Others have paid a far higher price." Anglesea died in December 2016, six weeks into a 12-year prison sentence. In 1999, former Hackney London Borough Council executive Samuel Yeboah won substantial damages and an apology after
16740-452: The world they are filed, since a compainant can look for a more favorable jurisdiction to file their claim. Investigative journalism usually requires higher insurance premiums, with some plans not covering investigative work altogether. Many common law jurisdictions recognise that some categories of statements are considered to be defamatory per se , such that people making a defamation claim for these statements do not need to prove that
16875-559: The wrongful conduct of the defender. For such reparation to be offered, however, the non-patrimonial interest must be deliberately affronted: negligent interference with a non-patrimonial interest will not be sufficient to generate liability. An actio iniuriarum requires that the conduct of the defender be 'contumelious' —that is, it must show such hubristic disregard of the pursuer's recognised personality interest that an intention to affront ( animus iniuriandi ) might be imputed. In addition to tort law, many jurisdictions treat defamation as
17010-631: Was false, the court ruled in its favour, saying that libel of a public official requires proof of actual malice , which was defined as a "knowing or reckless disregard for the truth". Many jurisdictions within the Commonwealth (e.g. Singapore, Ontario, and the United Kingdom ) have enacted legislation to: Libel law in England and Wales was overhauled even further by the Defamation Act 2013 . Defamation in Indian tort law largely resembles that of England and Wales . Indian courts have endorsed
17145-412: Was impossible to get one anywhere, and another saying, "Borrow mine. It's got a picture of the car." Following the abrupt change in reporting from newspapers immediately following her death, the issue also featured a mock retraction from "all newspapers" of everything negative that they had ever said about Diana. This was enough to cause a flood of complaints and the temporary removal of the magazine from
17280-599: Was introduced by the state of New South Wales in 2003, and then adopted nationwide in 2006. By contrast, Canadian law grants private corporations substantially the same right to sue for defamation as individuals possess. Since 2013, English law charts a middle course, allowing private corporations to sue for defamation, but requiring them to prove that the defamation caused both serious harm and serious financial loss, which individual plaintiffs are not required to demonstrate. Defamation in jurisdictions applying Roman Dutch law (i.e. most of Southern Africa, Indonesia, Suriname, and
17415-456: Was its first managing director. Its subsequent editor, Ingrams, who was then pursuing a career as an actor, shared the editorship with Booker from around issue number 10 and took over from issue 40. At first, Private Eye was a vehicle for juvenile jokes: an extension of the original school magazine, and an alternative to Punch . Peter Cook —who in October 1961 founded The Establishment ,
17550-423: Was long confined to a civil action for a monetary penalty, which was estimated according to the significance of the case, and which, although punitive in its character, doubtless included practically the element of compensation. But a new remedy was introduced with the extension of the criminal law, under which many kinds of defamation were punished with great severity. At the same time increased importance attached to
17685-457: Was not an issue of defamation. Another example of libel is the case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964). The Supreme Court of the United States overruled a state court in Alabama that had found The New York Times guilty of libel for printing an advertisement that criticised Alabama officials for mistreating student civil rights activists. Even though some of what The Times printed
17820-412: Was presented in a context that was – whilst clearly fictional – quite plausible. The assumed characteristics of the subject – a conservative reactionary, a "buffer's buffer" surveying the world through the bottom of a glass and not liking it one inch – gave ample opportunity for a rich and identifiable style; the image of Denis portrayed in the letters – a gin-soaked half-witted layabout, whose sole activity
17955-454: Was properly begun when they learned of a new printing process, photo-litho offset , which meant that anybody with a typewriter and Letraset could produce a magazine. The publication was initially funded by Osmond and launched in 1961. It is agreed that Osmond suggested the title, and sold many of the early copies in person, in London pubs. The magazine was initially edited by Booker and designed by Rushton, who drew cartoons for it. Usborne
18090-519: Was represented by top media firm Peter Carter-Ruck and partners—is a big psychological victory for the magazine". Libel Defamation is a communication that injures a third party's reputation and causes a legally redressable injury. The precise legal definition of defamation varies from country to country. It is not necessarily restricted to making assertions that are falsifiable , and can extend to concepts that are more abstract than reputation – like dignity and honour . In
18225-503: Was to try to escape the wrath of "the Boss" – was a popular one, and Denis Thatcher remained in the public imagination as a less gaffe-prone version of the Duke of Edinburgh long after both the Thatcher government and the series itself had ended. The portrayal was not entirely negative; Denis Thatcher was portrayed as having a sharp and witty tongue, and a keen eye for events around him. Whilst
#646353