Laurence Fox Legal Threat Hypocrisy

It might have been thought by those observing the less than fruitful career trajectory of former minor thesp, failed chanteur and ineffectual political hopeful Laurence Fox that he had one unshakable conviction in his championing of free speech. But it seems that thought would have been sadly misplaced: for Lozza, even free speech has its limits.

That limit was reached earlier this week when one Tweeter asserted that Fox was “a virulent racist”. Considering The Great Man’s sneering comment about “Lewis Hamilton’s white half” and his accusing those pointing out his “white privilege” of being racists themselves, allied to the Tweeter concerned having fewer than a thousand followers, this does not look like the hill on which Lozza should choose to die.

But choose he duly did: “Hello Liz. I have instructed my lawyers in this matter. You will be hearing from them shortly. There is not a single shred of evidence that I am racist in any way whatsoever. I take a principled stance against racism in all its forms”. This went down terribly well with his fans. But with many others, it just went down terribly.

One of those in the latter category warned him “You might want to remove that glass-of-milk emoji then”. That emoji has its origins with Richard Spencer, a white nationalist. Its meaning suggests the person displaying it is similarly inclined, a member of the alt-right.

Another observer noted that Fox had previously claimed “My view is that free speech should extend all the way to direct incitement to violence … I don’t think Twitter should censor these opinions”. The comment to which he’s objecting doesn’t go that far.

That observation was followed by one reminding us that Fox had not only claimed that calling him racist meant that the person doing it was also being racist, but that he had made the blanket claim “wokist are fundamentally racist” in addition.

James Doleman, who has some experience of court reporting both north and south of the border, first pointed out that this looked like a case of “Do as I say, not as I do” before adding that Fox’s target was “An account with 900 followers and a tweet he wasn't copied into”. His conclusion? “Don't see the High Court wasting much time on this case”.

Worse, as was noted in response, was that Fox “has republished the alleged defamatory post to a much larger audience”. He can hardly go after the original Tweeter for amplifying the alleged libel when he did it himself. Especially as that Tweeter has now had to take her feed private because Fox’s fans have been going after her.

Laurence Fox is either being poorly advised when it comes to threatening defamation actions against others, or he’s full of crap. Either way, time to get the popcorn in.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet8