01/03/2025
This is our second report on the defamation case Cao v Stuff.
This report's headlines are below and more detail is at https://www.blossfest.com/Menu/FestivalNews
Headlines:
Judge: Mr Farrow (Stuff Reporter) sought photographs of difficulties Mr Wood (neighbour) described:
Do we have any pictures from previous years of the s**t that’s gone on ‘cause that would be really, really good.
Judge: Mr Farrow (Stuff reporter) indicated he used such enthusiastic terms as a strategy to obtain the most impactful information from Mr Wood (neighbour).
Farrow and Wood spoke as follows: Farrow: I’ve got 500 or 550 words and as you said we’ve gotta discuss the angle and what points we’re actually locking on to.
Jeni McManus (journalist expert): In terms of angle, the what “we’re” going to focus on, reinforces the idea that ... he and Mr Wood have a common interest on the same side of the dispute.
Jeni McManus A responsible journalist will never discuss angles with their sources.
In fact, Mr Farrow proactively was wanting to discuss a specific angle.
The McManus expert opinion was not seen (or heard) by the jury as the judge decided they did not need to see it.
