I, for one, love hiring libel attorneys to shut down criticism of me shortly after I sign an open letter decrying censorship. https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1286370245851189248 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @mattdpearce
The difference between disagreement and libel is actually a real thing, and lawyers have hashed it out at great length, and you too can understand it if you read something besides Twitter
14 replies 3 retweets 119 likes -
Replying to @thefuzzybastard @mattdpearce
Ah, thanks for saying this, I was gearing up to attempt the same education. Libel is a real and serious thing, which most people don't recognize because they casually libel others all the time. The basic requirement that bad things you say about someone be true is foundational.
5 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
No, see, the idea that ordinary speech among ordinary people is defamatory "all the time" and only gets enforced when someone chooses to lawyer up is a deeply toxic view It's the big difference between UK/US libel law and why UK libel law sucks
2 replies 4 retweets 47 likes -
You obviously don't understand libel law. You can call someone a bad person, because that's a value judgement. But you cannot make a factually untrue claim about another person, and that's a pretty reasonable standard to hold society to.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Calling someone a transphobe is a value judgment
1 reply 2 retweets 21 likes -
I believe the allegedly libellous statement is that she "attacked and harmed trans people". Personally I consider that borderline, but it's absolutely a factual statement, not a value judgement.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
The article did not actually say that in so many words, that's the interpretation of the article they wrung out of the editor in the apology And even if it had said that, no, it would still be a value judgment
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.