Media lawyers grasp on the law, seems lacking
Yesterday’s note on angry flaks, leads to today’s about angry lawyers. Y’all need to calm down.
This missive here (names redacted, to protect the guilty) is absurdly heavy handed.
Short version: A PR company sent out a press release that was either inaccurate or plainly open to being mis-understood.
The legal eagles write, huffily, saying “we do not consent to or authorise any republication of the press release”.
Well, I don’t need your consent. It was given the moment it landed in my inbox.
Furthermore, they expect that hacks should “confirm in writing that you will accede to this request”.
This suggests that they have no idea which hacks the release went to in the first place. Or that they spammed it to so many of us it would be impossible to ring us all up for a polite conversation.
Lawyers seem to think hacks are easily intimidated by legal letters. More usually, they get mocked and put on noticeboards.
No one mentioned in these letters comes out of it well. They go into the memory-bank of people who desperately need to be subject to a really good wind-up.
Contact the Tomorrow's Business team firstname.lastname@example.org