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.
2 comments:
This decision is certainly timely. Too much journalism these days is slipshod and agenda ridden as the offenging articels were. Bolt was out to create a fuss, resentment even, concerning some Aborigines and now if the likes of him wish to do that they will have to be much more objective and analytical in their presentation. Journalists may have to so some old fashioned research instead of simply googling!
Petering
Your introduction was brilliant! No further comment required
Post a Comment