UPDATED Court Rules - it's arguably defamatory to show a picture of Sarah Hanson Young in a bikini.
Monday, 09 December 2013
Here's how News Limited has reported it today - read the full article at news online.
AUSTRALIAN Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young can argue that ZOO Weekly magazine sexually objectified her when they photoshopped her head onto the body of a lingerie-clad model, a Sydney judge has ruled.
Senator Hanson-Young is suing the magazine for defamation over the photo and article entitled "ZOO's Asylum Seeker Bikini Plan", published in July 2012.
The publication came a week after her emotional address in the Senate about Australia's humanitarian intake of asylum seekers. The magazine had said it would house the next boatload of asylum seekers in the ZOO office, if the Greens' immigration spokeswoman would agree to a "tasteful" bikini or lingerie photo shoot.
Senator Hanson-Young says the article implied that being a sex object was the only thing she was good for, that she was not a serious politician, that she was a "joke" and that her asylum-seeking stance had exposed her to ridicule.
Bauer Media, which owns ZOO magazine, has claimed the article was plainly intended as a joke.
It sought to strike out Senator Hanson-Young's imputations, but in the Supreme Court in Sydney on Monday, Justice Lucy McCallum said they should each be allowed to remain.
"Given, to use a colloquial phrase, the fast and loose nature of the publication, I do not think the (magazine) can be heard to say the matter is not capable of conveying an imputation of sexual objectification," Justice McCallum said.
Sarah Hanson Young thought a photo-shopped picture did this:
Senator Hanson-Young says the article implied that being a sex object was the only thing she was good for, that she was not a serious politician, that she was a "joke" and that her asylum-seeking stance had exposed her to ridicule.
What would the court make of this? She seems to do a pretty good job all by herself, with no photoshopped images within cooee.
Senator Hanson-Young says the article implied that being a sex object was the only thing she was good for, that she was not a serious politician, that she was a "joke" and that her asylum-seeking stance had exposed her to ridicule.