Freedom of Speech

[Corinna Dunne]

What do you think of this?

The Irish News (in Belfast) has been successfully sued for defamation by a restaurateur (link here}. The review, the restaurateur claimed, was defamatory, damaging and hurtful and he said that the Irish News had failed to apologise or print a retraction. The damage is £25,000 plus costs.

The Belfast newspaper printed a review of Goodfellas restaurant, written by esteemed food critic Caroline Workman, in a Saturday edition in August 2000. The review of the Kennedy Way restaurant criticised the quality of food and drink, the staff and the smoky atmosphere. She gave it a rating of one mark out of a possible five.

I didn’t see the piece, but based on what was printed today, it seems unbelievable. The publication has launched an immediate appeal, but does this open the floodgates?

Edited February 9, 2007 by Corinna Dunne (log)

[Nathan]

defamation (slander and libel) jurisprudence is far more liberal under UK law (which I imagine applies in northern Ireland)...than under American law. in other words, it is far easier to bring such a suit...and win...under UK law. UK law is weighted in favor of protecting individual reputation over free speech while U.S. law is weighted in favor of free speech. Canada generally follows the UK lead while India and Australia have lately moved in the U.S. direction.

nevertheless, veracity and fair comment are defenses under UK law. according to the link, this was a jury verdict. what I don't know is at what stage in a UK court proceeding that veracity and fair comment defenses are considered for purposes of summary judgment etc. it may be that this is saved for appeal.

hopefully a UK barrister will comment on this thread and explain this for us.

[Gareth]

Does anyone have more of the background on the Northern Ireland libel case (briefly, the Irish News has been fined £25,000 for a restaurant review about “Goodfella’s” pizzeria that a High Court jury found “defamatory” ?)

BBC News Report

Recognise this is a difficult topic to discuss without sight of the offending article. Also – for the avoidance of doubt and peace of mind of the moderators – I’m really not suggesting anyone reprint it here ! But I would be interested if anyone has read it, what their take is. Was it patently a step-change more ill-informed or a hatchet job than the usual tosh from AA Gill (especially given that being a) a pizzeria and b) called Goodfella’s, expectations should surely have been somewhat limited to begin with) ?

Alternatively, how did it measure up to the kind of thing we throw about on e-gullett, either in our opinions of restaurants or, indeed, restaurant crtics (see AA Gill, q.v.).

Gareth

[jayrayner]

Would be great if someone could merge the two topics here.

I'll throw in my thruppence worth. Obviously without being able to see the review, now that it has been ruled defamatory, we can't comment on the specifics of the case. But Nathan has laid out the basic law. The laws of libel apply as equally to the restaurant critic as they do to the court reporter. So I assume there was something in the review which could proven not to be true.

An example: if you say the soup came from a packet and it didn't, you could be sued for libel. The rather obtuse formulation I once used to get round this was along the lines of 'the soup tasted like it had come from a packet, which is an achievement given they had made it themselves from scratch'.

If the jury found in favour of the plaintiffs, despite there being no issue of veracity, then I imagine the Irish News will be granted the right to appeal, and the case will start the merry dance upwards. It's what happens there that becomes interesting. Appeal court judges do, of course, have the power to overturn a verdict if it is deemed wrong on a point of law. For the moment we must assume this verdict was correct.

Will it change the way British restaurant critics behave? Unless the media lawyers are exceptionally twitchy, I should think not. As long as what we write is either true or fair comment - or both - then it's business as usual.

Edited February 9, 2007 by jayrayner (log)

[Infrasonic]

More here on defamation and libel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A1183394

I

[Zoticus]

Will it change the way British restaurant critics behave? Unless the media lawyers are exceptionally twitchy, I should think not. As long as what we write is either true or fair comment - or both - then it's business as usual.

←

Even if it isn't "true or fair comment - or both", the phenomenal costs involved in pursuing a libel suit, and the financial disparity between media corporations and small businesses should continue to ensure that restaurateurs remain one of the few communities about which one can publicly say whatever one likes.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Zoticus (log)

[fisherman]

Well, unless you want to criticise Heston, then you'll have Zoticus running up and down your trouser leg snapping at your nuts.

[Zoticus]

Well, unless you want to criticise Heston, then you'll have Zoticus running up and down your trouser leg snapping at your nuts.

←

Like everything else, Heston has his own way of dealing with critics.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Zoticus (log)

[fisherman]

Oh man, Hestons such a gangsta bad boi!

[Zoticus]

Oh man, Hestons such a gangsta bad boi!

←

Yes, a sort of 'molecular yardie'.

[fisherman]

What an interesting concept, he could pop a nitro green tea and lime mousse in yo ass

[rjs1]

[KimS]

This isn't the first time Ms Workman's been in trouble for her writings in the Irish News (and on her now defunct website)

She had a spat with Michael Deane some years back and someone else (name escapes me, but he was a local Chef/Restaurateur I think) commenced legal proceedings for libel/defamation but I don't think it ever got to court as it was settled 'on the steps' as they say. My hubby knows more and when I find him, I'll ask him.

Edited February 10, 2007 by KimS (log)

[tony h]

How does this affect us? UK critic publishes in UK newspaper - easy to follow & understand.

We in UK post "reviews" onto a US based server; the US based server sends pages which are displayed or "published" on UK PCs. Or US based person reviews a UK establishment & posts on eG which is seen from UK. Or UK people post about US restaurants. And any other combination you can think of.

So which laws apply - US or UK or both? Can I claim that I publish in UK or US? Can I ask for 1st amendment protection?

[naebody]

An example: if you say the soup came from a packet and it didn't, you could be sued for libel. The rather obtuse formulation I once used to get round this was along the lines of 'the soup tasted like it had come from a packet, which is an achievement given they had made it themselves from scratch'.

←

Careful. By suggesting an alternate meaning here, it could be considered that you've committed libel. After all, anyone with access to Google would still be able to find the relevant review.

My two years of media law training can be summed up as follows: it's fine to say that a chef's soup tastes like shit, but not if you say it tastes of shit.

which laws apply - US or UK or both? Can I claim that I publish in UK or US? Can I ask for 1st amendment protection?

You "publish" everywhere something can be read, with local law applying. The physical location of the servers is irrelevant (unless the defamed party tries to sue the ISP, at which point it gets extremely complicated).

Edited February 10, 2007 by naebody (log)

[rjs1]

My two years of media law training can be summed up as follows: it's fine to say that a chef's soup tastes like shit, but not if you say it tastes of shit.

Or that the squid ink sauce tastes like Quink but not that it contains Quink?

[Infrasonic]

I'll have to be carefull how I put this, but an ex taxi driver has the dough to start a restaurant called "goodfellas" and then has the dough to pursue a defamation case through the courts from 2000 to now! (no puns about pizza bases and dough please....)

That must have been one hell of a taxi!

Or did he have backers with rather a lot of "disposable" cash...

I wonder if Kim S or any other Belfast EGulleteers can shed any more light on this.(whilst retaining their kneecaps obviously)

I

(who really lives in the congo)

[sunbeam]

Obviously a bad review that then sends covers plummeting is something that must hurt a business very badly. That said most reviews probably have little or no longterm effect as a large percentage of the year's diners won't have read them at the time nor remember them a few weeks later even if they did.

What is an interesting grey area is when a reviewer uses a review to show off, on the basis that it's easier to knock than praise, certainly it's easier to be wittier when knocking than praising.

If you could argue the review was simply a self-indulgent piece of copy aimed at getting the reviewer noticed and contained exaggerations, lies and what we call in advertising weasel copy (Rayner gives a good example earlier in this thread) then it might be worth suing.

Especially if you thought the jury might give you £25K!

I expect that payout will be reduced on appeal and all will blow over

S

Edited February 10, 2007 by sunbeam (log)

[Infrasonic]

http://www.bestofbothworlds.blogspot.com/s...thern%20Ireland

Some accounts from the court proceedings.

Seems she may have made some statements as factual, rather than opinion.

I

Edited February 11, 2007 by Infrasonic (log)

[Clerkenwellian]

Even if it isn't "true or fair comment - or both", the phenomenal costs involved in pursuing a libel suit, and the financial disparity between media corporations and small businesses should continue to ensure that restaurateurs remain one of the few communities about which one can publicly say whatever one likes.

←

[sunbeam]

http://www.bestofbothworlds.blogspot.com/s...thern%20Ireland

Some accounts from the court proceedings.

Seems she may have made some statements as factual, rather than opinion.

I

←

In which case she was very careless, or cocky, or both. Libel law in this country is weighted to the plaintiff. But I don't suppose the 25K will come out of her salary anyway.

S

[Fat Guy]

While the burdens of proof are different in the UK than they are in the US, is there any substantive difference in the law of defamation? Isn't it the case in the UK, as in the US, that (as Nathan mentioned) opinions are protected speech and cannot be the subject of a defamation claim? If so, and if the journalist in question made false factual claims about the restaurant, it would constitute defamation in either country. Might be harder to win in the US. Is there really no way to get hold of the text of the original story? Isn't it part of the public record from the trial?

[KimS]

The review's still available online if you know where to look...

[sunbeam]

The review's still available online if you know where to look...

←

but we obviously don't!

Spill it

S

[jayrayner]

I would be exceptionally surprised if it still were. It is standard practise for reviews in these circumstances to be taken down pronto by the legal people.