As previously mentioned, the judgment of the Federal Court in Eatock v. Bolt is the length of a short novel. I'll have difficulty treating the issues properly in the space of any number of blog posts. This post is just to say that I spent most of today reading it and trying to get few things about it clear in my mind. I'll comment in more detail soon.
Currently, I still have rather mixed thoughts and feelings about it: I have little sympathy for Andrew Bolt or The Herald Sun. It seems to me that they defamed a number of individuals. On the other hand, I'm also not entirely happy about how this case and the judgment were framed, or about the provisions under which the case was conducted.
About Me
- Russell Blackford
- Australian philosopher, literary critic, legal scholar, and professional writer. Based in Newcastle, NSW. My latest books are THE TYRANNY OF OPINION: CONFORMITY AND THE FUTURE OF LIBERALISM (2019); AT THE DAWN OF A GREAT TRANSITION: THE QUESTION OF RADICAL ENHANCEMENT (2021); and HOW WE BECAME POST-LIBERAL: THE RISE AND FALL OF TOLERATION (2024).
1 comment:
I agree with a lot of your intial sentiments. It seems to me that Bolt should have been taken to court but it probably should have been for defamation.
Post a Comment