Public Figures, Mocking and Court Battle
Welcome to part 2 of the story. If you’re interested in a short history of the people involved, check out part 1.
In this part, I want to explore the idea of public figures and what is okay to discuss, blog, or write about them, especially during public legal battles. Although the case of Owens and Echard serves as an example for this discussion, it is not really just about them. Instead, it delves into the broader ethical and legal issues surrounding public figures and the legal challenges they often face.
What is a public figure? Let’s see:
A public figure is a person who has achieved fame, prominence or notoriety within a society, whether through achievement, luck, action, or in some cases through no purposeful action of their own.
A person can become an “involuntary public figure” as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. A person can also become a “limited public figure” by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest.
Discussion of a person on the Internet may at times rise to the level that it causes the subject of discussion to be treated as an involuntary public figure.
But if you want to explore further, check out wikipedia!
Are they both a public figures?
While Clayton Echard’s status as a public figure is undeniable, given his football career and appearances on reality television. His involvement in these areas shows a deliberate pursuit of public recognition. There’s no need for further debate.
But what about her?
I think she is, and the AI also thinks so. Hehe.
She has a Medium account and has written several articles on the subject of her court battle. Does this imply she shouldn’t? Not necessarily. She’s entitled to express her opinions and thoughts. Although, that doesn’t mean anything to me; I have an account also. Does that make me a public figure? Legally, no. But in my opinion, anything posted online becomes public, regardless of privacy policies and such.
Despite legal definitions, her interactions with media outlets like The Sun and podcasters Dave Neal and Reality Steve, participation in major horse shows covered by newspapers, and role as a public speaker, suggest she could be considered a public figure, if not at least a limited one.
My question in this blog is: Can I openly discuss a public court battle and share my thoughts about the case?
I asked two AI to provide answers. I enjoy consulting AI about everything, but that doesn’t mean I blindly believe everything they say. Instead, I typically fact-check information before accepting it as truth.
Can I mock them?
Is it satire?
What is mocking and satire?
Mocking and satire are both forms of commentary or criticism that use humor, irony, or exaggeration to highlight flaws in individuals. But satire is broader form of commentary that critiques bigger issues like society, politics, culture, or human behavior. It tries to make us think or change by exposing flaws, hypocrisies, or injustices. While both mocking and satire involve humor and criticism, satire usually has a more thoughtful approach, with a deeper message about how things work in our world.
My exemple from the suspended article:
“Despite not obligated to, unlike LO, I visited the doctor due to feeling unwell. He advised a week of rest. So… I had time to read them all, take notes. After compiling plenty of notes from court filings, I took screenshots to ensure my “hard work” wasn’t in vain. Now, I’ve chosen to share them. HEHE”
Is this considered mocking?
What’s your take on it?
Is this satire or mockery?
