Comments on: Has a review hurt your feelings? Then why not sue? http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082 Freelance journalist Gary Marshall on technology, the Internet, music, Macs and more Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:46:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Gary http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082/comment-page-1#comment-4743 Gary Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:44:17 +0000 http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082#comment-4743 According to the guardian, the review said the cola was flat and the chicken so sweet it was pretty much inedible. Hardly the worst restaurant review ever written... According to the guardian, the review said the cola was flat and the chicken so sweet it was pretty much inedible. Hardly the worst restaurant review ever written…

]]> By: mupwangle http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082/comment-page-1#comment-4725 mupwangle Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:03:44 +0000 http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082#comment-4725 >>..ginger pubes in my pasta” when the restaurant was empty and the place doesn’t serve pasta, that’s a whole different thing. The chef could've been dark-haired. >>And that raises the question of what Goodfellas will do to you if you, an individual diner, complain about the service. You really need to ask? ;-) >>..ginger pubes in my pasta” when the restaurant was empty and the place doesn’t serve pasta, that’s a whole different thing.

The chef could’ve been dark-haired.

>>And that raises the question of what Goodfellas will do to you if you, an individual diner, complain about the service.

You really need to ask? ;-)

]]> By: Gary http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082/comment-page-1#comment-4723 Gary Fri, 09 Feb 2007 14:28:42 +0000 http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082#comment-4723 I wonder: given that the restaurant in question seems to be a cheap local eaterie, was the libel claim based on the paper holding it to the same standards as a Gordon Ramsay job? I can see how that would work as a libel case. I wonder: given that the restaurant in question seems to be a cheap local eaterie, was the libel claim based on the paper holding it to the same standards as a Gordon Ramsay job? I can see how that would work as a libel case.

]]> By: Gary http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082/comment-page-1#comment-4722 Gary Fri, 09 Feb 2007 14:19:04 +0000 http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082#comment-4722 Obviously it's hard to comment properly without knowing what the original review said, but if it was "The starter was stodgy, the main course minging and the dessert a disaster" then I don't see how that's grounds for libel. On the other hand, if the review said "ten people died of food poisoning before my drinks arrived and there were ginger pubes in my pasta" when the restaurant was empty and the place doesn't serve pasta, that's a whole different thing. Obviously it’s hard to comment properly without knowing what the original review said, but if it was “The starter was stodgy, the main course minging and the dessert a disaster” then I don’t see how that’s grounds for libel. On the other hand, if the review said “ten people died of food poisoning before my drinks arrived and there were ginger pubes in my pasta” when the restaurant was empty and the place doesn’t serve pasta, that’s a whole different thing.

]]> By: Squander Two http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082/comment-page-1#comment-4719 Squander Two Fri, 09 Feb 2007 13:49:02 +0000 http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/1082#comment-4719 The paper are appealing, thank God. I really hope this'll be overturned. I find myself slightly conflicted: on the one hand, I'm all for jury nullification and will fiercely defend the right of juries to return decisions that they feel are right even if they're legally incorrect; on the other hand, there's this sort of crap. <a href="http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?id=79959" rel="nofollow">This is interesting:</a> <blockquote> "The outcome of this case raises profound questions involving the freedom of the press," a spokesman for the Belfast-published Irish News said. "We firmly believe that newspapers must have the right to publish fair and honestly written reviews, contributed by experts in their particular field and engaging in either praise or criticism when it is justified."</blockquote> See, I think "freedom of the press" is a much misunderstood expression these days (especially by members of the press). There is no special right to criticise reserved for the media: the principle is surely that <i>everyone</i> has the right to express opinion, not just newspapers. And that raises the question of what Goodfellas will do to you if you, an individual diner, complain about the service. The paper are appealing, thank God. I really hope this’ll be overturned. I find myself slightly conflicted: on the one hand, I’m all for jury nullification and will fiercely defend the right of juries to return decisions that they feel are right even if they’re legally incorrect; on the other hand, there’s this sort of crap.

This is interesting:

“The outcome of this case raises profound questions involving the freedom of the press,” a spokesman for the Belfast-published Irish News said.

“We firmly believe that newspapers must have the right to publish fair and honestly written reviews, contributed by experts in their particular field and engaging in either praise or criticism when it is justified.”

See, I think “freedom of the press” is a much misunderstood expression these days (especially by members of the press). There is no special right to criticise reserved for the media: the principle is surely that everyone has the right to express opinion, not just newspapers. And that raises the question of what Goodfellas will do to you if you, an individual diner, complain about the service.

]]>