Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Comment
February 11, 2015updated 12 Feb 2015 3:27pm

Libel lawyers Carter-Ruck on why sorry shouldn’t be the hardest word for editors

The non-denial denial has long been famous as a cringingly bad attempt to avoid blame (or telling the truth), where over-qualification either weakens the denial, or kills it completely. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,” or “We have no plans [before the election] to introduce tuition fees.”

And so it is with apologies. A swift and genuine apology, which reflects the gravity of the libel in question, can go a long way to countering reputational damage, whereas a late, dismissive or obviously calculated apology, will often backfire.

Apologies matter because they to go to the heart of why libel laws exist, which is to protect and vindicate reputations. Injunctions and compensation have an obvious role, but often the key remedy is some form of corrective statement – it gives the claimant a practical means of facing detractors, as well as a shield against future fallout.

You've reached your limit of free articles

Please register now to continue reading

Already registered? Log in here
Websites in our network