I see Mary Lou is joining the compo culture brigade with a defamation lawsuit against RTE.
It's not like Sinn Fein and their previous leader haven't tried to gag bad press for the party before.
The broken record keeps on playing, 'if they criticise my guys they be Shinners'.
How did I “went after Chay Bowes”?
I mentioned Chay recently after he was confirmed to be running fake accounts and also after numerous articles and posts online which he was told was incorrect yet he has never apologised or withdrawn
So are we not allowed question a so called journalist for this carryon? Or because he is clearly aligned with SF he should be given a free pass?
A look back at these guys reaction to the media revealing what a Tanaiste and former Taoiseach confessed to and apologised for after threatening to sue, will tell you all you need to know.
Juicy stuff there if you read the relevant thread.
'It's great when we can score political points, not so great when the media goes against our guys'. 😁
Are you talking about how you and blanch etc. went after chay bowes because he'd a hand in the Leo leak story? Or the many times on here lads are critical of a journalists private life because he/she has a story making politicians they like look bad?
What constitutes 'an online mob'? Is it lots of people with opinions you don't like or the likes of yourself and the others comparing MLMD to putin for suing RTE? :)
This is brilliant, it really is. Loving the hyperbole and pearl clutching.
Keep it up.
We all have the right. I support that for everyone. Besides the comedy milage from swing gate was almost comparable to all the other government minister guffaws combined.
So herself and Denis broke the law or have different rights than you and I? Please explain?
Poor auld Dinny. Was a time people would jump down your throat for mentioning him, now they're using him.
The answer is in this question blanch if you would answer it.
Should nobody have a right to redress?
Yes or No?
QED.
If you didn't fear the answer to the questions you wouldn't run from them.
Again, is your contention here that Dáil privilege's should not exist?
They were not invented by Mary Lou.
If anybody abuses DP then sanctions should apply.
The other one I forgot was the campaign by Paddy Cosgrove to attack trolls on twitter, clearly it should have been a campaign against all trolls but only attacked those who didn't support Sinn Fein.
Along with the issues on boards , with Paddy on Twitter, the group "who haven't gone away" looking after local visits, the online mob attacking anyone and everyone, Mary Sue and TD's attacking media forms with defamation cases. It certainly is a concerted campaign against dissenting voices.
It is not that the cases are frivilous, it is, as in Mary-Lou's case, that they are designed to silence the media. A threat to freedom, not the first threat to freedom that Sinn Fein have supported over the years.
So Leo was attempting to silence the media but Mary-Lou is not. What utter hypocrisy from you.
Leo said something in the heat of the moment and on reflection correctly backed down from suing, while Mary-Lou coldly followed up her threats with action to silence the media. What a disgrace.
It certainly has that appearance. Worrying times for our democracy. No wonder no other parties wanted to do a deal with Sinn Fein after the last election.
Do the people that Mary-Lou defamed in the Dail have a right to redress? Did you criticise her for that? No, you didn't, you defended her use of privilege.
You see the right to redress is not absolute in the case of defamation. Any politician that takes defamation action must be viewed with a jaundiced eye (unless it is something very personal or related to family etc.). The primary motivation in this case appears to be to silence bad press. It is a disgrace.
Do you accept that Leo was attempting to silence the media?
Do you think a person (whosoever) has the right to recourse or not?
*I suspect you will also run from these questions as your hypocrisy will be exposed.
No need to lie
Anyway as I posted this is just the latest in a campaign by Mary Sue and the rest of SF against the media
Concerning times
The converse is true also.
You and a certain cohort will criticise everything SHinner while defending others who do it.
I have criticised SF over several incidents/events. Fact BA, facts defeat you.
At least Mary Sue knows that no matter what she or Sinn Fein does you will always take their side.
But it's not just Mary Sue is it Francie, what about all the other cases that Sinn Fein TD's are taking? clearly a sustained attack by the party at the media. Along with the constant barrage at specific journalist online by the mob who deem them "non SF supporters" it seems like an organised campaign to shut the media down in Ireland
Varadkar was criticised for NOT going through with his threat. He did exactly what was outlined here, tried to shut down the story through legal scare tactics.
Mary Lou apparently has gone through with her threat and issued proceedings. Over what specifically, we don't know.
Now, does Leo's actions therefore preclude anybody from seeking redress?
Simple question Donald, you guys are running from.
Does she or anybody else (including Leo) have the right to seek redress? Yay or nay?
It has been reported that MLMD has filed a defamation suit against RTE. We don't know the exact sentence or word she has taken exception to. Therefore we cannot criticise her?
In the case of LV, it was reported that he might file a case for defamation. We don't know the exact phrase or sentence he took exception to. Therefore we can criticise him?
Seems a little inconsistent
He was going to sue on grounds that the article was misleading and defamatory.
A few days later he was accepting the content of the article and apologising for wrongdoing.
In relation to MLMD, we don't even know what specific thing that was said is the subject of the case.
She hasn't 'threatened' to sue, she has moved to sue.
Now, you either believe a person has the right to do that or not.
You can hold your court when we know the specifics.
Do ANY OF YOU care to answer - has she (or anyone else) the right to redress or not. Yes or No?
Do you know exactly what he was going to sue for?
Because with MLMD, we apparently can't say anything with any sort of negative tone because whatever she is suing for, nobody can tell.
Would you apply the same standard to criticism of LV?
Was it an attempt to do what the EU stated blanch?
He wasn't 'hounded' because he threatened, he was hounded to proceed with a suit, because everyone guessed it was frivolous and attempt to shut down an independent media outlet which exposed something he later had to confess to and apologise for.
So answer the question blanch:
Do you think somebody should have recourse if they feel they are defamed/slandered.
It's a Yes or No answer.
Your criticism of frivolous cases should be directed at those who are giving out frivolous awards, if there is no defamation why are they accepting liability?
We can judge whether MLMD's case is frivolous only when we know the details.
Sure, just look at the criticism over on the Leo thread where Leo talked about suing the Village. He was hounded for weeks, and that wasn't the national broadcaster.
Mary Lou could get into a car, drive over a person, reverse back over them and you would have people still on here defending her. It is totally illogical. One minute you have SF supporters shouting and roaring about the media and they are corrupt, not telling the real story etc etc etc
The next minute SF are trying to shut down the media from reporting and suddenly this is in the interest of everyone.
I would say it is baffling carry on but in reality it is not at all, next week if Leo took out a defamation case about someone he would be the World worst and trying to shut down the media
It Mary-Lou was only interested in correcting the record, she could have gone to the Press Council. However, by initiating a defamation action, she is attempting to silence the press.
"Although Ireland ranks highly in press freedom indexes, its legal system is among the most vulnerable in Europe to abuse by vexatious litigators"
"The fact that defamation is no longer a criminal offence offers little comfort to journalists and media outlets due to the lengthy legal process and significant costs associated with a defence. In some cases, the burden of a lawsuit could be high enough to close a media outlet for good. Few media outlets decide to take the risk of going to court, often opting to settle instead."
This is what Mary-Lou is aiming to do.
