George Clooney Proves Shaming Really Is Better Than Suing

George Clooney

George Clooney is proving that shaming really is better than suing a newspaper. The shaming is something that people are still talking about and are unlikely to forget, despite the publication taking the story down. The news has gone viral, and people around the world are discussing the implications and how bad a tabloid newspaper is.

For those who are unaware still, the Daily Mail published a story that stated there were problems between Clooney and his wife-to-be Amul Alamuddin, because of her mother’s alleged religion. The outlet explained that those of the Druze faith cannot marry outside of that faith, which is something that Alamuddin will be doing by marrying the 53-year-old actor.

The problem is that the story has been completely fabrications, and the Daily Mail would know that. In April, the paper published a story that stated Alamuddin’s mother was not a Druze, so it would void all the arguments for any potential disagreements over the marriage. Just recently, the mothers of the happy couple were even spotted together looking extremely happy and friendly.

Clooney decided to speak out about the story, because it put people around him at risk. He could have gone the route of suing for libel, but decided that naming and shaming the publication was much better. Over the last few days Clooney really has proved that shaming is better than suing after all.

By suing, which is something stars in the past have done, all the details are kept relatively quiet. While the public can eventually find out some of the details, they are not all laid out bare. The celebrities often go back to their private lives, leaving the public guessing over their side of the story. While they have every right to do that, the public do have some right to know how the story was fabricated and decide whether the publication is worth buying again in the future.

There are also problems with the court cases being long and drawn out. The judges can even find in favor of the publications because there is not enough evidence against them for a successful libel case.

When someone publicly names and shames a publication in the way that the Oceans 11 actor did, the whole world finds out both sides of the story. Clooney was able to put out all the reasons why the story was fabricated, and keep his family and future in-laws safe. The publication was even able to issue an apology, along with a reason behind the fabricated story.

Even though the original story has been taken down, the memory of it is still around. The details of the original story can be found in other publications, along with The Monuments Men’s op-ed pieces with the USA Today. All the works are being shared on social media quickly and effectively, so people can make up their own minds on whether to trust the Daily Mail again.

While suing is fine when it comes to seeking damages for stories that really ruin someone’s reputation, sometimes shaming is the best way to go. Clooney is proving that shaming the Daily Mail really is a better option than suing.

Opinion by Alexandria Ingham


The Independent

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.