It wasn’t because of the subject Teh Bolta broached that he fell afoul of the law – it was the inaccurate, misleading, sarcastic, mocking, insulting, offensive, provocative, inflammatory and bad faith way he wrote about it:
30. Finally, in dealing with the formulation of the orders to be made by the Court, I have observed that it is important that nothing in the orders I make should suggest that it is unlawful for a publication to deal with racial identification, including by challenging the genuineness of the identification of a group of people. I have not found Mr Bolt and the Herald & Weekly Times to have contravened section 18C, simply because the newspaper articles dealt with subject matter of that kind. I have found a contravention of the Racial Discrimination Act because of the manner in which that subject matter was dealt with.