This man is a hypocrite trying to get UK to pull out of the human rights bill and then using article 10 to appeal his case

these fox news there are racist they are not a news station there are bound of racist who they are pack together to just go aganist obama and black poeple latino.wake up from monring with fox and friend till on a record late night dey just go aganist obama no new it just to lie every day so my people of uk send dem bak to usa to go and meet glenn beck calling obama racist on live tv,ruch limbo said he want obama to failed so uk people send dem back pls

According to bloggers in Coventry the Councillor interviewed by Gaunt implied that foster parents who smoked were effectively untrustworthy and that was why he did not support them fostering children. If that is true then the Councillor was himself offensive to foster parents who smoke. I didn't hear the broadcast so I am uncertain as to whether that is what he said.

I think this article does not do justice to the court ruling on this case.

The High Court said the word Nazi was “capable of being highly insulting” but that in context it “may be seen as an emphatic and pejorative assertion that Mr Stark (the Councillor) was, in the matter of smoking and fostering children, one who imposes his views on others. It was not, in the context, a description of Mr Stark’s wider political or ideological position.”

Although the Court accepted that the language used by Mr Gaunt was ‘political speech’ and thus deserving of the highest level of protection under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act, it found that Ofcom’s finding was justified because Mr Gaunt had “lost his rag” and the later part of the interview had become abusive shouting and NOT because he described the Councillor as a Nazi per se.

It was not, therefore, a total defeat. For Mr Justice Blair said Gaunt's use of the word "Nazi" was protected on human rights grounds because it was "political speech",the judge said he found that Gaunt's conduct of the interview "became increasingly abusive, hectoring and out of control". When dismissing Gaunt's judicial review action, he ruled that the DJ's labelling of Stark as an "ignorant pig" had "no contextual justification at all and was said with such venom as to constitute gratuitous offensive opinion abuse".

The judge also accepted that the discussion on Gaunt's show was "political and controversial" and "the person interviewed was an elected politician who would expect to receive and tolerate a rough ride". "It was therefore an interview where the claimant's freedom of expression should be accorded a high degree of protection and that was capable of extending to offensive expression".

I think that's a pretty fair judgement.

Ralph

Jon Gaunt, Kelvin MacKenzie et al are thinly veiled bigots who use their [unfortunately] far-reaching platforms to spout their hateful views.

This ruling is, in my opinion, most welcome.

Isn’t this a case for industrial tribunal? He was sacked for being ill mannered and rude just like Brand and Ross. Allowing Jon Gaunt to solve this dispute through the HRA is just more political correctness gone mad in soft-touch Britain. You couldn’t make it up!

Gaunt's views,whilst to the right, are not extreme, he campaigns against the BNP, believes in capped immigration, but is not anti immigration full stop.
I support him, and i'm a left thinking person of the old school. he is anti BBC, in thinking Radio 1 and 2 should be sold, but supports all other BBC Radio.He does not fit into the bracket most try to put him into.

Thanks George for shedding light on the difference between free speech and free universally broadcast speech.

I hadn't thought of it before and we need to think of it that way.

The Foxification of UK news continues apace. Just take a look at the format and content of ITV News every night of the week to appreciate that point. The most insulting, right leaning trash it's ever been my misfortune to come across in this country...and I'm including SKY News in that judgement.

Bryan Rose Jr

I am afraid not. The Right will never rise in the UK in the same way that it has in the US and there are a number of reasons for this:

1. Geographic: We are a small Island, the states is vast country. We certainly have more media outlets and a plurality of views expressed within them.

2. Political: This is the Britain of the welfare state, the NHS, set up by socialists. There has never been such an apparatus set up in the US because of the TEA party and the republicans (ably supported by their lobbyists in the pharma and health insurance industries).

3. As for the BBC being left biased, thats a canard and you know it is. Nick Robinson, political editor no less, former young tory. They are providing no challenge to the coalition and have been asked not to by the DG.

4. The right have enough media outlets, talk(bollocks)Sport, SKY News and the Mail, Telegraph, Times, The Sun, The Express, The Economist,The Spectator. To be countered by the Guardian, The Mirror, this august publication. So who already controls the media?

The right will be shown for what it is in the next few months as the cuts bite, people are unemployed, made homeless. I think you will find a repudiation of the right will come.

In fact I believe one of the first law the coalition should pass is the one that stands in the States and Canada in relation to the ability to own a media outlet and residence. This should go through the same Bill that abolishes OFCOM. (Not that I agree with that abolition, but as Murdoch paid for the election, this is his quid pro quo). The Coalition could show some backbone maintain OFCOM and stop the BSKYB transaction but I doubt it will if current form is anything to go by.

Isn't it perverse that Gaunt could well be relying on his hated (meddling) European Court of Human Rights to get him off the hook. You couldn't make this up!