The second form of public interest expression is that which reveals that the public has been misled and/or highlights hypocrisy. In such circumstances, according to Eady J, the court must ask publication in some way prevent ‘would the public from being misled?’ Or is the intrusion of publication seriously necessary and proportionate prevent the public from being significantly ‘to misled by [the claimant’s] public claims’. This justification was illustrated in where the claimant accepted that Campbell her false claims to be drug-free justified the defendants setting the record straight, albeit shorn of unnecessary detail. Similarly, Rio Ferdinand’s depiction as a reformed, mature family man justified the Sunday Mirror’s publication of a story (and corroborating photo) of his adulterous affair. Here Nicol J claimed that this form of public interest argument is ultimately premised upon the importance of revealing truth. This proposition is supported more generally by the ECtHR guidance in which confirms that the Axel Springer veracity of the disputed information is a relevant criterion in the balancing exercise. It thus corresponds to one of the fundamental justifications for free expression, rooted in John Stuart Mill’s thesis, that the free On Liberty exchange of ideas ultimately furthers the discovery of truth. Yet Mill’s argument applied almost indiscriminately to a wide range of expression, even (counter-intuitively) that which was false or of quality’. This is because ‘low for Mill, truth was just part of the issue; as Wragg explains, his main concern was individuals hold their truths. Mill repeatedly and eloquently stressed how the importance of debate and interaction with opposing views so that truths could be actively tested, properly understood and rationally held rather than being passively received, and petrifying [the mind] against all other ‘encrusting influences’. So the truth justification for free expression does not precisely fit with the narrower misleading the public ground. In Eady J expressly Mosley
The second form of public interest expression is that which reveals that the public has been misled and/or highlights hypocrisy. In such circumstances, according to Eady J, the court must ask ‘would publication in some way prevent the public from being seriously misled?’ Or is the intrusion of publication necessary and proportionate ‘to prevent the public from being significantly misled by [the claimant’s] public claims’. This justification was illustrated in Campbell where the claimant accepted that her false claims to be drug-free justified the defendants setting the record straight, albeit shorn of unnecessary detail. Similarly, Rio Ferdinand’s as a reformed, mature family man justified the Sunday Mirror’s publication of a story (and corroborating photo) of his adulterous affair. Here Nicol J claimed that this form of public interest argument is ultimately premised upon the importance of revealing truth. This proposition is supported more generally by the ECtHR guidance in Axel Springer which confirms that the veracity of the disputed information is a relevant criterion in the balancing exercise. It thus corresponds to one of the fundamental justifications for free expression, rooted in John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty thesis, that the free exchange of ideas ultimately furthers the discovery of truth. Yet Mill’s argument applied almost indiscriminately to a wide range of expression, even (counter-intuitively) that which was false or of ‘low quality’. This is because for Mill, truth was just part of the issue; as Wragg explains, his main concern was how individuals hold their truths. Mill repeatedly and eloquently stressed the importance of debate and interaction with opposing views so that truths could be actively tested, properly understood and rationally held rather than being passively received, ‘encrusting and petrifying [the mind] against all other influences’. So the truth justification for free expression does not precisely fit with the narrower misleading the public ground. In Mosley Eady J expressly depiction
08_FINAL_PI_article_JML.docx