Rebel with a cause to celebrate

Rebel Wilson took on the Bauer Media gossip mags and won

PETER OVERTON: She’s a Rebel with a cause, and now a victory under her belt. Hollywood actress Rebel Wilson today winning her epic defamation trial against Bauer Media, the company found to have published a series of malicious and damaging articles.

— Channel Nine News, 15 June, 2017

Hello, I’m Paul Barry, welcome to Media Watch.

And chalk one up for the little guy over those trashy women’s magazines that stretch the truth to breaking point.

Sure, she is a millionaire Hollywood actress but Rebel Wilson risked all against the might of Bauer Media and after weeks of courtroom drama she emerged victorious:

REBEL WILSON: Far too often I feel the tabloid magazines and the journalists who work for them don’t abide by professional ethics. Far too often I feel that their conduct can only be described as disgusting and as disgraceful. I’m glad, very glad, that the jury has agreed with me. And by their unanimous, overwhelming verdict they have sent a very, very clear message.

— Channel Nine News, 15 June, 2017

And clear it was. The six-woman jury decided on Thursday it had no doubt the star was viciously defamed by a series of articles in Woman’s Day and other Bauer magazines that had portrayed Wilson as a liar and a fantasist:

SAMANTHA ARMYTAGE: Among the defamatory claims made in articles published by Woman’s Day magazine were that Rebel was not her real name, she lied to journalists about being six years younger than she actually is, and that she also lied about being related to Walt Disney.

— Channel Seven Sunrise, 16 June, 2017

It was a Woman’s Day splash in 2015 that sparked the action. And as the court heard it provides a fascinating case study of how the gossip mags ply their trade:

JUST WHO IS THE REAL REBEL?

“She’s clearly got a vivid imagination,” laughs our source.

“Maybe you have to tell stories to make it in Hollywood!”

— Woman’s Day, 25 May, 2015

So, who was the source?

Surprisingly, the magazine actually had one: a still unidentified classmate who contacted Woman’s Day via its website in 2012.

Reporter Shari Nementzik began negotiating with her the following year. The source demanding payment for dirt and old photos but rejecting an initial offer of 500 bucks.

Then more photos and information arrived and the offer was bumped up to $3000.

But in November 2013 a nervous Nementzik emailed the source to say:

… We’ve come into some problems about the story. We’ve been doing research and there are a lot of articles where they do put her age as 33, and some where she says her real name is Melanie etc. If she hasn’t been lying as such, it will be hard to do the story.

— Email, Woman’s Day to source, 5 November, 2015

Shortly after that, Woman’s Day claimed, falsely as it turned out that, they were ditching the story on legal advice:

… we sat with lawyers and unfortunately the information can’t be used in a story because it’s too problematic. But due to all your troubles and being so kind, we would like to pay you $1k for the tip-off.

— Email, Woman’s Day to source, 6 November, 2013

That should have been the end of it.

Or so you’d think.

But eighteen months later, in 2015, Nementzik hit the source’s inbox again:

… my editor asked me to get back in touch with you because she’d love to do a fun story on all the facts you supplied about the “Real Rebel Wilson”.

— Email, Woman’s Day to source, 11 May, 2015

And why the change of plan? Because Rebel had a film coming out and it was just the perfect time.

But while Woman’s Day Editor in Chief Fiona Connolly loved the dirt file.

She told Nementzik she was still:

…worried about legals as we’re calling her a liar based on a woman who won’t go public.

— Email, Woman’s Day to source, 12 May, 2015

So, Connolly was suggesting they could have fun with it instead.

Yes, really.

Keep it vague, don’t be too mean and you’ll probably get away with it.

But as Matthew Collins, QC, argued for Wilson:

We learned in the course of this trial that Bauer Media thinks that magazine reporting is somehow different from other journalism. It is not.

— Plaintiff’s Closing Address, Matthew Collins QC,
Plaintiff’s closing address, 8 June, 2017

No, it is not. And Bauer have now found out the hard way.

Damages are yet to be awarded but it could be a multimillion-dollar sum on top of a million dollars in costs.

Congrats @RebelWilson They must be held accountable. Justice is done!

— Twitter, @lleytonhewitt, 16 June, 2017

Congrats @RebelWilson Woman's day has been a disgraceful magazine for a long time, hopefully this makes them report facts & stops the rubbish

— Twitter, @shanewarne, 16 June, 2017

Or at least make them a lot more careful, before they make up their stories.

But if it does have that effect, how on earth will they fill their trashy mags?

YOUR COMMENTS