Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article" - NME.com; libel c

UPDATE 11:00 AM PT:

Link posted by joe frady (original post) with additional info:

NME apologises to singer Morrissey over article - BBC News

The NME has publicly apologised to singer Morrissey over an article it published in 2007, which, the singer claimed, suggested he was racist.

Excerpt:

An NME spokeswoman said the magazine was "pleased it has buried the hatchet" with the singer.

She added the matter of the libel case was now closed and that the settlement did not involve payment of any damages or legal costs.

The case had been due to go to trial next month after Morrissey won a pre-trial hearing against former NME editor Conor McNicholas and IPC at the High Court last October.



George M sends the link:

NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article - NME.com
NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article

In December 2007, we published an article entitled 'Morrissey: Big mouth strikes again'.

Following this, Morrissey began proceedings for libel against us. His complaint is that we accused him of being a racist off the back of an interview which he gave to the magazine. He believes the article was edited in such a way that made him seem reactionary.

We wish to make clear that we do not believe that he is a racist; we didn’t think we were saying he was and we apologise to Morrissey if he or anyone else misunderstood our piece in that way. We never set out to upset Morrissey and we hope we can both get back to doing what we do best.


UPDATE 11:00PM PT:

Scan of NME print edition, page 11 posted by Iona Mink:

nmeapology.jpg




Related item:

 
Last edited:
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

It would be useful if some members of Solo were lawyers and could comment with some authority on this.... anyone? Is it a case of both sides backing down because they cannot afford to take it to trial with any confidence of winning? If Morrissey was the victor, I'd expect at least a donation to PETA from NME... but all we get are a few lines (on the back page of a faded annual)

From my own understanding, even when people successfully sue against newspapers, the apology is usually a couple of lines tucked away on p11 - it is never as prominent or large as the original offending article - it was front page, full page and several pages within http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=07/11/27/192220

Dave
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

It would be useful if some members of Solo were lawyers and could comment with some authority on this.... anyone? Is it a case of both sides backing down because they cannot afford to take it to trial with any confidence of winning? If Morrissey was the victor, I'd expect at least a donation to PETA from NME... but all we get are a few lines (on the back page of a faded annual)

From my own understanding, even when people successfully sue against newspapers, the apology is usually a couple of lines tucked away on p11 - it is never as prominent or large as the original offending article - it was front page, full page and several pages within http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=07/11/27/192220

Dave

Those who win legal battles usually end up losing a lot of money even if they win their case. It makes perfect sense to accept an apology if one is offered. It's a case of accepting an apology or going to court, win or lose and everyone still having the same opinion as before anyway and losing a bunch of cash to boot.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad the case ended this way. Morrissey will do what he loves, tour in Athens and Istanbul instead of wasting his time with a court case and wrecking his moods.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

In his end of tour statement in Dec 2011 Morrissey said:

"Instead of simply saying "sorry" (for re-writing the answers to my last NME interview in 2007 in order to make me sound racist), the imperious NME would rather spend hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds in a High Court duel to the death. The fact that they have chosen a court drama over simply apologizing reinforces the notion that their original intent all along was to invent a sensation."

All he ever wanted was for the NME to say sorry, It was never about the money, he said so back when "The Word" magazine printed similar stuff and he accepted their apology. Morrissey hasn't climbed down or bottled it or received advice that he wasn't going to win at court, his position has always been the same and he has now got exactly what he wanted. All of those links are to articles with a positive news story about Morrissey. The Guardian is the only exception where there is an undertone to the positive headline but don't forget that paper has links with Tim Jonze (he writes for them or certainly once did for a while) and it is well know for its incredibly wet and PC approach to subjects like immigration. They print a quote from Morrissey from August 1992 (which he himself descibes as horrible and pessimistic) ".....black and White people will never get on or like each other...." They fail to remind readers that in April of the same year shortly before that interview took place the six day LA race roits occurred in which 53 people died.
 
Last edited:
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

They print a quote from Morrissey from August 1992 (which he himself descibes as horrible and pessimistic) ".....black and White people will never get on or like each other...." They fail to remind readers that in April of the same year shortly before that interview took place the six day LA race roits occurred in which 53 people died.

Wow. You are using the L.A riots to justify Morrissey's comments. Just wow.

P.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Wow. You are using the L.A riots to justify Morrissey's comments. Just wow.

P.

Oh please, All i am saying dear Uncle is that an horrible and pessemistic view like that is more undertandable in the wake of such horriffic events. Its would have been unimaginable at the time to think that within 10 year of that event we would have a black US president. Its all about context - that is my only point. You can misunderstand me if you wish and fake astonishment at the very idea *drops monocle from eye.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Oh please, All i am saying dear Uncle is that an horrible and pessemistic view like that is more undertandable in the wake of such horriffic events. Its would have been unimaginable at the time to think that within 10 year of that event we would have a black US president. Its all about context - that is my only point. You can misunderstand me if you wish and fake astonishment at the very idea *drops monocle from eye.

I'm amazed that you think that comment is justifiable under ANY circumstance.

P.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

I'm amazed that you think that comment is justifiable under ANY circumstance.

P.

really??? amazed? - because clearly in your world you imagine the history of the relationship between differing races has been opitimised by the song ebony and ivory. Lets all hold hands and be blind to the obvious shall we? Certainly its a pessimistic view but it is based on something and that something isn't (before you start) prejudice but rather disapointment and dismay at human nature and current affairs
 
Last edited:
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

really??? amazed? - because clearly in your world you imagine the history of the relationship between differing races has been opitimised by the song ebony and ivory. Lets all hold hands and be blind to the obvious shall we? Certainly its a pessimistic view but it is based on something and that something isn't (before you start) prejudice but rather disapointment and dismay at human nature and current affairs

So, if I said "f*** all those darkies", then after justfied it by saying some cataclysmic event had framed the context, would you say that was acceptable?

P.

P.S - don't make assumptions about my musical taste or frame of mind please. My sensibilities are the result of far more than a shit song.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

really??? amazed? - because clearly in your world you imagine the history of the relationship between differing races has been opitimised by the song ebony and ivory. Lets all hold hands and be blind to the obvious shall we?

Oh, now you're ragging on the handicapped too? Shame on you!
stevie-wonder.jpg
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

In the UK though, defamation cases are different to almost every other criminal or civil case; the plaintiff doesn't have to prove they were defamed but rather the defendants (normally journalist and publisher) have to prove that no defamation took place. Unlike most other cases, the onus is not on the plaintiff but instead on the defendant(s). It is guilty until proven innocent.

Yes, I know. What I meant to convey was that the legal opinion given, probably to both parties, seems to have been that Morrissey's claim of defamation wasn't difficult to rebut or, more technically, that the burden of proof on the NME wasn't going to be that difficult to discharge.

I think what you are missing here is the impact on perception. All the reports of this (outside of this website) are headed "NME says sorry to Morrissey". Followed by content which suggests the NME have climbed down to avoid court and Morrissey has accepted that apology (which is all he ever wanted). basically the message being "Do you remeber when the NME made a fuss about Morrissey being a racist well, they've been made to say sorry and admit that he isn't racist afer all".

Since we don't know what's actually in the minds of readers, all of this is moot. I have to say, though, that this all sounds like wishful thinking on your part. Yeah, some casual readers will probably just read the headlines and see the words, "NME", "Morrissey" and" apologise" and assume that Morrissey got what he wanted. Casual readers, however, probably don't give a toss very much and will also remember that "Morrissey" is a name associated in the public eye with racism. For anyone who has any interest in the story, I'm sure they'd take the time to read all two paragraphs. They'll look at the "apology" and see it for what it is: a non-apology.

I agree it wasn't a clear cut case had it reached court and there was it appears a prolonged negotiation but bearing in mind the outcome its clear who "won" that negotiation. I am guessing the NME made a number of offers and when Morrissey got (an apology in the magazine) what he wanted he accepted. Had Morrissey held out longer perhaps he would have got a fuller apology (which by the way would have been reported in exactly the same way) but I assume the NME were never going to offer a full and absolute apology as part of the negotiation because it would effectly be an admission of guilt (a full confession) and would have meant them losing the court case should he have refused the offer and then used it as evidence against them. The apology was worded very carefully, they are not about to admit guilt (and leave themselves open to costs and damages) but they have admitted that they lost the argument.

You can tell yourself that Morrissey "won" as much as you want; I see no judicial verdict that either vindicates him or castigates the NME's bad practice. How you can pretend that Morissey '"won" that negotiation' baffles me. The NME have neither conceded that they said anything inappropriate nor acknowledged that they tried to defame him or mislead their readers. Morrissey wanted his day in court; he said so in the statement I quoted in my last post. He wanted a dramatic victory and failed to get it. You can, out of some weird loyalty to a celebrity, try to maintain that Morrissey is delighted with the statement that appeared in the middle of this week's NME (as opposed to on the front page, to be commensurate and comparable with the presentation of the initial story), but we all know that what he actually wanted was an unequivocal and unambiguous apology from the NME. That he couldn't secure such an apology from them is a reflection only of the weakness of his case against them. If he'd had a strong argument to make in court, he'd have pursued the case. You know it and I know it.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

So, if I said "f*** all those darkies", then after justfied it by saying some cataclysmic event had framed the context, would you say that was acceptable?

P.

P.S - don't make assumptions about my musical taste or frame of mind please. My sensibilities are the result of far more than a shit song.

Crumbs where did that come from? Thats a bit much isn't it? Morrissey was not apportioning blame or or putting either party down its hardly a comparable quote even on principle.

and okay but I think we'll both agree "Say say say" was a much stronger song. Stop jumping on everything Uncle and blowing it out of its own arse. What do you think he meant then?
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Crumbs where did that come from? Thats a bit much isn't it? Morrissey was not apportioning blame or or putting either party down its hardly a comparable quote even on principle.

and okay but I think we'll both agree "Say say say" was a much stronger song. Stop jumping on everything Uncle and blowing it out of its own arse. What do you think he meant then?

Do you know? No. Neither do I.

You're blindly supporting something he said. I await the day when Morrissey shits in a balloon and bursts it over the head of disabled children, so you can salute it as an understandable reaction to world events.

P.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Oh, now you're ragging on the handicapped too? Shame on you!
stevie-wonder.jpg

Yes and No, i was just a little to subtle for you the "hold hands" was a reference to Paul "I wanna hold your hand" Mcartney and you are half right because the "blind to the obvious" was actually a reference to Stevie who is blind, obviously.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Do you know? No. Neither do I.

You're blindly supporting something he said. I await the day when Morrissey shits in a balloon and bursts it over the head of disabled children, so you can salute it as an understandable reaction to world events.

P.


hahaha back to this kind of thing are we? ("You'd let him poo on you and you'd like it - arrrghhh") If you read back Uncle you will see that all i did with give the quote some context. I hardly even defended it when you popped up in mock horror I'm not sure why you imagine i'd blindly support it, in fact i echoed Morrissey's own words and would describe it as "Horrible and pessemistic".

It suits you to imagine me as a blind sycophnat but it isn't the case, I realise after all that Morrissey is just a bloke
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

It suits you to imagine me as a blind sycophnat but it isn't the case, I realise after all that Morrissey is just a bloke

Excellent.

P.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

It suits you to imagine me as a blind sycophnat but it isn't the case, I realise after all that Morrissey is just a bloke

The preponderance of evidence suggests otherwise, I'm afraid.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

So, if I said "f*** all those darkies", then after justfied it by saying some cataclysmic event had framed the context, would you say that was acceptable?

I've had a think about this and if the cataclysmic event you mention was say, a killer plague that targeted only black people and turned them all into lets say, undead flesh eating zombies for example then yes I'd think it would be okay for you to say "f*** all those darkies". Can i suggest you put on some sunglasses and look into the middle distance when you do.
 
Re: Article: "NME says sorry to Morrissey for the misunderstanding over 2007 article"

Do you know? No. Neither do I.

You're blindly supporting something he said. I await the day when Morrissey shits in a balloon and bursts it over the head of disabled children, so you can salute it as an understandable reaction to world events.

P.

:eek: Truly disappointed?!
'Yes you made yourself plain, yes you made yourself very plain.'

Sounds like you'd have been a great help to Tom Jonze & co. in writing the article to stick the knife in even deeper, drawing conclusions from opinions voiced in discussion such as you may hear every second day in Parliaments and pubs around the world, including in darker-skinned nations. If it's any comfort, the airing of this conflict again in its settling can encourage everyone to speak more carefully, eh? :guitar:
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom