Taking on The Sun

One of the side effects of the Jon Kerry non-affair affair this week has been to give Americans some idea of the journalistic 'standards' of some of the British press. It's almost a classic of the genre, with lots of heavy implication and little actual fact, heavy use of 'alleged' and 'allegedly' and, of course, made-up quotes.

Writing in The Guardian today, Sydney Blumenthal (who has personal experience of being on the end of a Drudge smear) suggest that John Kerry should sue The Sun over this story, offering the following justification:

In the US, there is virtually no legal protection for a public figure, especially a political one, from defamation. Libel laws are de facto defunct. Public opinion is inevitably swayed by this tainting, all journalism has fallen under suspicion and truth cannot easily be distinguished from malicious fiction. Only if Kerry (or Polier) were to sue the Sun under British libel law, for example, would this transatlantic corruption of the press be truly engaged. Then a British court would begin to set important rules in American politics.

Now, I have to admit that it's a tempting idea. Kerry taking on News International in the courts would be an interesting spectacle, especially given that Kerry and his wife have pockets deep enough to make funding a libel action comparatively cheap.

However, like many temptations, it's one best resisted. Firstly, it would be a big mistake in political terms - the 'scandal' is pretty much dead in the US and this would only reignite it. Second, any libel action would require Kerry to spend a lot of time in London when the case finally comes to court which would be bad at the best of times, but disastrous should it not come to court till October or November and frankly embarrassing should he be elected in November and then have to spend time in London fighting a court case that's become pretty much irrelevant.

Now, I'm not a lawyer (and neither do I play one on the internet) but from what I can recall of the Sun's reporting of the case, they covered themselves enough to be able to be able to say that they weren't libelling Kerry themselves but reporting that there were stories/rumours out there and so if they were to come to court they could have the basis of a sound defence. However, I'm not entirely sure about this - reporting potentially libellous reports may be as serious as making those reports in the eyes of English law, I don't know.

The best option here may be a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission. Yes, it's a pretty toothless body, but complaints from Kerry, as well as the woman accused in this and her misquoted family, are a way of putting the British press on warning that they are being watched, that their reporting does have an audience outside the UK, and that they need to be responsible and accurate in what they report about the US. It's a long way from a perfect solution (which would be something like Sky setting up a new channel filled 24/7 with profuse apologies to everyone the Sun and News Of The World have ever gone after just because they don't like them) but it might be the best in the current situation.