100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Summary Defamation Journals £8.29   Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Bournemouth University Talbot Campus (BUTC)
  4.  
  5. Bournemouth University Talbot Campus
  6.  
  7. Media and Entertainment Law

Summary

Summary Defamation Journals
 2 views  0 purchase

Links to journals that are great to include for critical analyse. I achieved a First on this paper by including these as it showed wider reading and a better understanding of the topic.

Preview 1 out of 1  pages

Document information

  • February 17, 2022
  • 1
  • 2021/2022
  • Summary

Subjects

Written for

All documents for this subject (2)

Seller

avatar-seller
lydiarosecrabb

Content preview

Defamation Journals

file:///Users/lydiacrabb/Downloads/Making%20sense%20of%20proprietary%20algorithms
%20and%20user%20behaviour%20on%20social%20media%20Arlene%20Foster%20v
%20Christian.pdf

Making sense of proprietary algorithms and user behaviour on social media: Arlene Foster
v Christian Jessen.

Comms L. 209

Page 2 – agreed that publishing a tweet to approximately 311,000 followers was clear that
publication was on a very large scale.

Page 3 - Arlene Foster v Christian Jessen is a good case for reasoning which can influence
similar courts who are seeking guidance to determine user behaviour as finding of fact when
using social media.

file:///Users/lydiacrabb/Downloads/120000%20damages%20for%20Mr%20Lachaux%20of
%20Defamation%20Act%20s1%20fame%20for%20serious%20failure%20of%20responsible
%20journali.pdf


£120,000 damages for Mr Lachaux of Defamation Act s.1 fame for serious failure of
responsible journalism

Page 2 – Warby J dismissed the defendant’s claim that he did not name the claimant and
therefore was not referring to him, which he elaborated could not therefore cause serious
harm. This was rejected.

The second issue, under s.4, was the defendants’ actual state of mind at the time of
publication. As Nicklin J noted, this element of the defence is not established by
demonstrating that a reasonable person could have believed that the publication was in the
public interest. The defendant must prove that s/he did believe that publication was in the
public interest. A failure to do so will mean the defence will fail.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller lydiarosecrabb. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £8.29. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

59325 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now

Start selling
£8.29
  • (0)
  Add to cart