Don't you just love it how when those with money and power get called out on their privilege they will slap down everyone they can with a defamation case.

From John Waters all the way up to JK..

People from marginalised groups need protection from these silencing measures, as most cannot afford a solicitor to defend them. Given that the mere threat of legal action forces people to retract genuinely held beliefs, in this sense, it is a form of private censorship

Technically, censorship only applies if it is sanctioned by the state. If these people are using the state (via the courts) as a means to restrict other peoples speech, then I would argue this is censorship on behalf of wealthy individuals by the state.

Were it possible for these people to fight the accusations, they would most likely win, as truth is the ultimate defence in a defamation case. In almost every case, they do not have the means to do so.

And yet those sending out solicitors letters are screeching about being "silenced" from their pulpits, purely because the proles had the audacity to disagree with their (whether directly intentional or not) hateful views.

What a world huh?

Just in honour of the memory of when even our national broadcaster was too afraid to defend a defamation case..

Some of those silencers could do with watching it.