I see Mary Lou is joining the compo culture brigade with a defamation lawsuit against RTE.
We don't want to go back to the days when a powerful politician like CJH could silence the media into submission and they were afraid to write about him. There is a pattern here with Sinn Fein trying to intimidate the media. This action makes Mary-Lou look like CJH-lite, and that is fair comment.
You said she makes laws.
MLMD is suing, through the legal process. Not tapping phones or sending the Garda around to surveil or intimidate journalists like FF and FG have done. Most recently a FG minister using the Garda to intimidate a blogger at the airport. Credibility and believability shot.
You are essentially claiming to be worried SF will behave like FF/FG already have and do.
Didn't think this through did you?
Media will always have cases taken against them.
In almost all cases the article / broadcast is taken away from public view immediately to prevent further defamatory damage.
In the Ms McDonald of sinn fein case Rte have not just left the broadcast up but have also very publicly stated what broadcast was involved.
This is egg on the face for ms McDonald.
The sinn fein leader was either trying to silence rte or looking for a Ching Ching Ching payout to fund her luxury lifestyle
Or felt defamed and took legal action.
Does a person need to be mentioned in the constitution to be able to be use the courts? You're not making sense here.
Are the courts only for people you like?
Do you understand the difference between an injunction and defamation? Really sounds like you need at least a Google of basic legal terms.
Powerful people have used libel laws to protect themselves and censor the media. You support that.
And of course the press would say that, they have a vested interest in not being held responsible.
You don't think press freedoms should be protected? You don't think the NGO's or the NUJ have a point?
Tell me this, why did SF advocate reforming the Irish libel laws?
Thought you said you couldn't think of another party leader engaging in SLAPPS...now when it suits you remember one?
Charlie was protected more by clientelism in our media than anything else. Self censorship.
Press freedoms should never impinge on individual freedoms.
You'll have to ask SF your last question.
So you have no opinion on whether libel laws are too loose in Ireland, but want the status quo?
As usual, tying yourself up in knots staying on the fence while telling everyone else off.
Courts should be a last resort.
They should never be used to silence truth which is what ms McDonald is doing.
Have you listened to the broadcast? Can you locate what she is calling "defamatory"
I've yet to find someone who can work it out.
Don't be putting words in my mouth mark.
I have asked you how do you protect a person's right to redress. How much freedom do you give to the media to say what they want?
Your answers are far from convincing tbh. Seems you only want to curtail some peoples rights and not others. Hence me asking where the threads where huffing and puffing about other politicians threatening to sue the media and actually suing the media.
Mod - I'm seeing more and more references to FF/FG creeping into the thread. Unless it's *directly* relevant in addressing a specific point ('yeah but FF/FG do this' does not count) then it'll be considered off topic posting and actioned as such
Ireland has the BAI. Why didn't MLMD go to them first?
Why? Because she is abusing her political position and trying to silence the national broadcaster.
The NUJ, and a number of NGO's protecting press freedom have concerns about this case and others like it.
You seem to think they are wrong for doing so.
Then of course SF are on record in wanting to reform the libel laws, and again you offer no opinion on that either.
As somebody said earlier the NUJ is a union, they protect their own. They have no more stature than that. I don't think they are wrong, I wouldn't expect a union to do anything else.
Ask MLMD why she didn't go to the BAI, I don't know why, maybe she thinks they are toothless?
You haven't said mark, how you protect the rights of the individual while preserving press freedom?
You still can't understand. So you are saying if I support the justice system I'm okay with a murderer getting off on a technicality. Do you realise how stupid that sounds?
So what is MLMD's case? What has she claimed about this segment.
Please don't tell me what you think her claim is, show us the 'facts'.
According to the reports (which are curtailed due to the SLAPP), MLMD took offence at Mairia Cahill asking others how they could share a stage with MLMD due to the behaviour of MLMD concerning the sexual abuse of Mairia Cahill by members of MLMD's political party.
I think that was a perfectly reasonable response from Mairia Cahill given the vitriol MLMD and the SF party put her through, which is also why MLMD would pursue a SLAPP type suit in this case as the goal isn't to win but to try and stop MLMD's past actions from impacting their current election strategy, the longer they can drag it out the better for them.
Now, that's the evidence, you can either engage with it or keep bouncing around like a jack in the box and playing into the entire purpose of a SLAPP which is to stop statements being released (I'm guessing lots and lots of bouncing).
So to be clear, MLMD is silencing the media, you can prove this by listening to "the morning Ireland show segment featuring Mairia Cahill that is on their website for all to download.
She's doing a pretty shitty job of silencing them.
Woah...how do we know the 'reports are curtailed'?
So are you changing from 'MLMD directing vitriol at MC'?
Well, yes, the strategy hasn't really worked as she expected, but we have a few posters who are holding the line regardless (even though watching them squirm is highly amusing and entertaining).
It was telling to see a few media outlets go further on what they could say and then see all the other outlets reference those articles, which is unusual enough (usually the outlet would run it's own story rather than referencing a competitor).
boingy boingy.
Serious backtracking going on.
You made an allegation that posters didn't like a woman in a position of authority. All I am doing is asking what position of authority she holds? You are now hiding from backing up what you were saying.
The Mary-Lou apologists keep making stuff up is desperate attempts to defend her. Another false argument rumbled.
Well, you are unable to tell us what the SLAPPs is about, so either you are not reading the reports or the reports are curtailed.
It is also a clear attempt by Sinn Fein to silence and smear the real victim in this case, who is Mairia Cahill. The fake concern for victims displayed by Mary-Lou's apologists has also been rumbled.
The case is about defamation.
Sinn Fein are on record saying that a person's right to redress in defamation law needs to be reformed and curtailed in order to protect press freedom. They believe this is needed so that the likes of CJH and Denis O'Brien cannot institute SLAPPs case.
Do you agree with them that public figures using defamation law in SLAPPs-type situations is wrong?
