Boyle wins £54,900 in 'racism' libel case

Quote:

---

Comedian Frankie Boyle has won
£54,900 in damages after a High Court jury concluded that the Daily Mirror had
libelled him by describing him as "racist".

The comedian said he was "very happy" as he left court. Jurors awarded Boyle £50,650 after concluding that the racist description was defamatory.

Jurors had been shown footage from the BBC satirical show Mock The Week, in
which Boyle and other comedians discussed immigration. He was given further damages of £4,250 after the jury found the Mirror's report saying Boyle had been "forced to quit" Mock the Week was defamatory.

The comedian said The Daily Mirror newspaper had "misunderstood" the context
of his use of language in jokes, adding the accusation of racism "goes against
everything I've tried to do in my work, to do in my life".

The Glasgow-born comedian said he had been "pretending" to be someone with
racist views during the episode.

---

Not sure where I stand on this or what he even said... but I still don't feel it correct to even pretend you have racist views. It's still racism at the end of the day.

He just takes his jokes too far sometimes, unnecessary.

I am fed up to the back teeth of people being sued, fined, arrested or sent to prison for saying or writing things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I am fed up to the back teeth of people being sued, fined, arrested or sent to prison for saying or writing things.

---

Do you mean discriminatory things or just 'anything that can be viewed as insulting' in general? :P I think some people make far too big an issue over what X, Y and Z has claimed but there needs to be a limit somewhere.

Prison would be insane though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Do you mean discriminatory things or just 'anything that can be viewed as insulting' in general? :P I think some people make far too big an issue over what X, Y and Z has claimed but there needs to be a limit somewhere.

Prison would be insane though.

---

All of it. If I want to stand in the street with a placard saying gay people are going to hell, then freedom of speech allows me that right but it also allows others to challenge me on that point. The same for racists, the same for unpolitically correct jokes, women's jokes and so on. The whole point of freedom of speech isn't to protect popular opinions - because popular opinions don't need protection. The point of freedom of speech is to protect the right to say unpopular things.

Anybody ought to have the right to say anything to me, that's freedom of speech.

My pet hate on this subject is people who say "well I believe in freedom of speech except for... X, Y and Z" - either you believe in it 100% or you don't. I posted the Rowan Atkinson speech on this the other day (in this forum) if anybody is interested to see where i'm coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

All of it. If I want to stand in the street with a placard saying gay people are going to hell, then freedom of speech allows me that right but it also allows others to challenge me on that point. The same for racists, the same for unpolitically correct jokes, women's jokes and so on.

Anybody ought to have the right to say anything to me, that's freedom of speech.

My pet hate on this subject is people who say "well I believe in freedom of speech except for... X, Y and Z" - either you believe in it 100% or you don't. I posted the Rowan Atkinson speech on this the other day (in this forum) if anybody is interested to see where i'm coming from.

---

I did watch that video and found it rather interesting, almost as good as Ann Widdecombe :P

Hmm I suppose I can understand where you're coming from and why anyone would adopt that view rather than a 'mixture', but I guess I'd be more concerned upon the emotional welfare of people who are "affected" by the hate speech. But then I suppose, emotional welfare could also be affected upon the people repressed of the right to free speech as well aha.

Hmm.

On that argument then Boyle shouldn't have sued the daily mirror for labelling him a racist. freedom of speech to say the joke, freedom of speech to attack the joke. seems we'd save a lot of time and money if the judge just said 'go away' during these cases then :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

I did watch that video and found it rather interesting, almost as good as Ann Widdecombe :P

Hmm I suppose I can understand where you're coming from and why anyone would adopt that view rather than a 'mixture', but I guess I'd be more concerned upon the emotional welfare of people who are "affected" by the hate speech. But then I suppose, emotional welfare could also be affected upon the people repressed of the right to free speech as well aha.

Hmm.

---

I don't have any responsibility and have never accepted any responsiblity for the 'emotional welfare' of other individuals.

But you may enjoy this speech by the late Christopher Hitchens on the topic, there are four parts; it's certainly one of the best arguments i've ever heard or read into the merits of true free speech and i'd advise anybody to watch.. he certainly makes you question yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Hg...feature=relmfu

Personally strongly believe here, that if comedy is to work you should be able to make a joke about ANYTHING. And thus the world needs to understand a joke is a joke and does not usually portray the views of the comedian unless they're harking on about personal issues.

So yeh, I don't believe Frankie Boyle is racist, just not scared to shove his fingers up to political correctness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Not sure where I stand on this or what he even said... but I still don't feel it correct to even pretend you have racist views. It's still racism at the end of the day.

---

So should Matt Lucas be in trouble for his Little Britain characters being racist? No.

People take comedians far too seriously, especially Frankie Boyle. People know he jokes about things right on the edge, people should deal with it...

It was pretty stupid of the Daily Mirror to brand Boyle a racist when he's not. He's a controversial comedian that could be perceived as racist, but he's actually quite a decent person. He mentions stereotypes a lot, but his intentions are usually clear. He's strangely good with young people, and he usually gets abuse thrown back from any walks of life, black or white, and throws abuse back in return. It would of been nice if the Daily Mirror referred to something in particular, which is probably why they lost the case as they were making wild accusations without backing the information up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

People take comedians far too seriously, especially Frankie Boyle. People know he jokes about things right on the edge, people should deal with it...

---

Agreed. People relying on the papers no doubt for information, and not actually seeing him in person or watching him in any shows. His live shows are amazing, and he'll go up to someone in the audience, mock them a bit and wish them well :P It's strangely adorable :P

I don't see anything wrong with this particular problem? Nobody reads or believes what the Daily Mirror has to say :S

Yeah actually I think freedom of speech is a big issue. It doesn't usually bother me but I think there should still be laws. If everyone could say whatever they like to whoever they want to, would that make it legal to say such awful things to someone that they end up committing suicide?

Not really sure where I stand with the whole Boyle issue tbh

Not sure about the comment in question but in general Frankie Boyle is insensitive and racist - and getting this court dealing will only spur him on more and make the public think it's perfectly acceptable to act this way. Disgusting.

He's given his damages to a campaign group called Reprieve.

It's funny people think he's racist. He acts racist, but isn't racist himself. He usually pretends to be one to highlight how stupid they really are in their beliefs.