Free speech, boobs and libel reform

12Nov10

Something is rotten in the heart of UK communications and libel laws.

Yesterday Twitter was collectively aghast at the news (via Jack of Kent) that Paul Chambers had lost the appeal to overturn his conviction of “menace,” stemming from a joke posted on the site.

Paul was arrested in January this year on suspicion of terrorism for posting the following tweet:

“Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!!”

I think I said worse last Christmas when my plane was grounded due to snow and I faced a Planes, Trains and Automobiles-like trek to get home for the holidays. I’ve also said far worse about…well it’ll take a while to do a mental recap, but that’s just human nature. We say things we don’t mean, we make flippant remarks we wouldn’t dream of acting on and exaggerate for comic effect. Social media grants us a wonderful platform for these flights of fantasy, hyperbolic rants and bad puns.

Since when is that a criminal offence? Well since yesterday.

The Crown Prosecution Service found no evidence of Paul’s intention to cause his followers to believe he was making a real threat but decided it was in the “public interest” to prosecute him anyway. He was found guilty on 10 May of sending a menacing message. He appealed this decision but Judge Jacqueline Davies dismissed his appeal on every count and he now faces several thousand pounds of legal costs.

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore

And the arrests are mounting up. Conservative councillor Gareth Compton was arrested for the tweet: “can someone please stone Yasmin Alibhai-Brown to death? I shan’t tell Amnesty if you don’t. It would be a blessing, really.” While that strikes me as an altogether more menacing remark, directed at a single person, I must say that I never thought a tweet could possibly lead to a criminal conviction.

The issue boils down to a chasm of understanding between those who use and understand sites like Twitter and those who have not. A simple choice you might think, one down to taste –these sites aren’t for everyone. And yet a man is now guilty of a criminal offence for something that I do every day. A judge found this an acceptable act, yet I am repulsed by it. That’s a hell of a divide.

Writer Graham Linehan put the issue brilliantly in a post on the Free Speech blog when he said the case was “the clearest indication yet that the world is divided into two sorts of people at the moment: The people who “get it”, and the people who don’t.”

Comedy writer and Twitter grandmaster Graham Linehan

This goes beyond telling your Dad how to work the Sky+. This shows a worrying gulf between the increasingly tech savvy public, blogging community and writers and a judiciary now facing legitimate criticisms for being out of touch.

But while the Crown Prosecution Service deemed Paul’s flippant remark to a handful of people within the “public interest” the English libel laws do not seem to protect the rights of science writers and doctors to scrutinise what they feel are unsubstantiated or misleading claims. Instead, they face legal action for expressing their opinions. What about the public interest in these instances?

Yesterday morning I raised a chuckle quickly followed by an eyebrow over the ridiculous story about Rodial’s Boob Job cream taking the moral high ground. The company sells a £125 cream said to, with repeat applications, increase breast size. Their website says:

“Always dreamed of a fuller bust but dreaded the thought of going under the knife? Rodial introduces a revolutionary formula in boob job. Boob job works with your natural fat cells. As the fat cells move around the body after eating, boob job “blocks” the fat into the area where the product has been applied, so the bust and décolleté areas. You will see a gradual increase in cup size within 56 days as well as gaining an instant lifting and firming effect. Increase in cup size by 8.4%. “

Exhibits A and B

Quite. For a mere £195 you can add a bum lift to that offer ladies.

Plastic surgeon Dalia Nield was quoted saying that it was “highly unlikely” that the cream could do what it claimed and it now appears that Nield has been threatened with a libel action. You would think that as a doctor she would be allowed to express concerns about the validity of these pretty incredible claims (let us remember this is about a cream that claims to make your boobs bigger) as they are in the public interest.

But Nield’s experience is by no means unique. You need only recall the case of Ben Goldacre (sued by vitamin peddler Matthias Rath) and Simon Singh’s battle with the British Chiropractic Association (sure we can cure colic) in recent years to see the unfair dangers that science writers face for being skeptical about unsubstantiated claims; scrutinising so the general public has a clearer view of products and services that could affect their lives.

Coincidentally this week marks the first anniversary of the Free Speech is Not for Sale report, which highlighted the oppressive nature of English libel law, its hostility to writers and seemingly friendly position towards powerful corporations or individuals looking to silence dissenting voices. The British Government has committed to drafting a bill to reform libel but the campaign needs more support and I would urge you all to sign the campaign petition via www.libelreform.org/sign.

Go to www.libelreform.org/sign

Where does this leave us? When the rights of those looking out for our health and welfare are silenced out of fear of what a corporation with limitless money and legal representation can do. And now the rights of private citizens to make jokes and be themselves- to just be funny – are in danger from those within this legal framework who do not seem to understand the world in which they live.

Hell our cultural identity is so defined by that dry, sometimes bawdy, sometimes inappropriate, sardonic British humour. As a west coast Scot I wouldn’t be able to communicate with 80% of my family without sarcasm. It is part of our makeup and the day a man is pilloried, financially crippled and branded a criminal for cracking a joke is a sad day indeed.

The issues of censorship and libel reform that have arisen through these separate cases highlight a singular need: a need for change. What disturbs me most is that underneath these seemingly different issues there lies one ugly suggestion – keep your mouth shut. Don’t say anything out of turn, or what the courts define as out of turn; don’t disagree with companies and individuals more powerful than yourselves. That’s a frankly appalling message to pass on to the public and we need only look at the protests outside Millbank House this week to see what happens when people feel marginalised and ignored (and of course hijacked by violent thugs).

What I ask of you today is to sign up to the Libel Reform petition, follow the #libelreform hashtag and retweet the below 140 character edit of Paul’s original post with the hashtag #IamSpartacus.

“Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve got a week to get your shit together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!” #iamspartacus

It’s already trending worldwide, has the support of high profile tweeters such as Graham Linehan, Dave Gorman, David Mitchell, and Marcus Brigstocke. You can also donate to Paul’s defence fund here.

If awareness is not raised and resistance falters we run the risk of our civil liberties being slowly chipped away and that is surely something worth rebelling against.

Filed under: Rants and raves   |  2 Comments
Tags: crown prosecution service, freedom of speech, libel law, libel reform, paul chambers, robin hood airport, twitterjoketrial