Today's Crikey [mostly via subscription but some items on line at Crikey.com - by the way, a sub to Crikey is well worthwhile] has this:
"Piers Akerman calls himself a journalist
Misha Ketchell writes:
Last December Daily Telegraph columnist Piers Akerman had this to say about Crikey:
It can be argued that almost anyone can call themselves a journalist these days, as evidenced by the nonsense published by people claiming to be journalists on websites such as Eric Beecher and Stephen Mayne's Crikey.
This week a NSW judge had this to say about Piers Akerman, in the course of awarding a $200,000 defamation payout (plus costs) to NRMA director Richard Talbot (judgment here).
The inaccuracies of fact by the defendant... are gross. To accuse the plaintiff of failure to attend committees that do not exist when he consistently attended meetings of the board which did consider such issues is so extreme a misstatement of fact as to vitiate any defence of comment for any imputation based on it.
Yep, anyone can call themselves a journalist these days. Even Piers Akerman."
"Piers Akerman calls himself a journalist
Misha Ketchell writes:
Last December Daily Telegraph columnist Piers Akerman had this to say about Crikey:
It can be argued that almost anyone can call themselves a journalist these days, as evidenced by the nonsense published by people claiming to be journalists on websites such as Eric Beecher and Stephen Mayne's Crikey.
This week a NSW judge had this to say about Piers Akerman, in the course of awarding a $200,000 defamation payout (plus costs) to NRMA director Richard Talbot (judgment here).
The inaccuracies of fact by the defendant... are gross. To accuse the plaintiff of failure to attend committees that do not exist when he consistently attended meetings of the board which did consider such issues is so extreme a misstatement of fact as to vitiate any defence of comment for any imputation based on it.
Yep, anyone can call themselves a journalist these days. Even Piers Akerman."
Comments