Katie Price VS Frankie Boyle

The Heated Debate- What do you think?

Frankie Boyle is a well known comedian who features on Mock the Week and has his own channel 4 show called Tramadol Nights. It was here in December 2010 that he made the most crude 'despicable mocking' (Daily Mail 10th December) against her 8 year old son Harvey Price who suffers from condition known as septo-optic dysplasia (underdevelopment of the optic nerve) and has also now been registered as blind. On his comedy show which was broadcast to over 1 million viewers he made the harsh joke 'Jordan and Peter Andre are still fighting each other over custody of Harvey - eventually one of them will lose and have to keep him.' As if this wasn't enough he went on to say 'I have a theory about the reason Jordan married a cage fighter - she needed a man strong enough to stop Harvey from f****** her...' This seemed to be a step too far as it raised at least 50 complaints from viewers and angered Katie who called in her lawyers to investigate and formally write a complaint to channel 4 on her behalf. Although his comment was written in the form of an opinion I cannot see that this could be referred to as 'fair comment' as although Frankie believes what he has written to be true (or he can be accused of malice which would destroy his defence), he has used both offence language and comment to offend not only Harvey and his family, but also other parents and children that are similarly disabled. As Katie complained alongside the public it lead Broadcasting watchdog Ofcom to also have to investigate further into the comments towards her disabled son. As the comments weren't recorded in a written form, this can be seen as a case of 'slander' where the damage may not have intended to be permanent as it was spoken, however does allow Katie and Harvey to  be libel for compensation due to there being an audience of over 1 million. It can also be argued that although he spoke the comments, there would have been a written script that has been accepted by Channel 4 as mentioned below.

The Channel 4 chief executive, David Abraham admitted that he personally signed off Frankie Boyle's controversial joke about Katie Price's disabled son, as a committee of MPs attacked the broadcaster's senior management for failing to offer an unreserved apology for the comedian's comments. It wasn't just Katie and the public that his comments offended, he also received further backlash against his shows after a blind charity called for a boycott of his latest tour. The comedian who was well known for his confrontational style of comedy is facing the wrath of the Royal London Society for Blind People who have described his jokes as ‘outrageous’. Although Katie had her lawyers involved to write a letter to channel 4 on her behalf to complain about the comments of Frankie, she didn't sue him or take him to court as all she wanted was an apology from both Frankie himself and Channel 4 for allowing such an offending comment to be made on live television. However even this seemed to be impossible for Katie as Channel 4 refused to apologise for the comment by Boyle, stating 'that it was part of his live routine which has been used previously on his tour,' the channel also issued a warning of explicit and ‘uncompromising adult material’ before screening the show in December. However it might prove useless as Boyle hasn’t got any more live dates in his diary, leaving people with no gigs to actually boycott.


Although it was supposed to be a 'joke' on live television used supposedly as part of his comedy act it will also have damaged Katie's reputation as well as offended her by not only it being her son, but the way in which Katie was also used in context. The script was clearly not based on 'facts' when referring to Katie and Harvey's relationship as although Katie has to be more loving and caring to Harvey no one should step the line by making such crude allegations. Although this may not have literally taken Katie and Harvey's reputation away from them due to the public complaints, it in a way has damaged Katie's as it refers to her as   being a uncaring and unkind mum specifically when the media have twisted the idea of Peter and Katie arguing against one another to not have Harvey, when in fact it was more likely to be over who has custody over Harvey. Using the equation..


Publication + Defamation + Identification= Libel


I will evaluate weather there could have been a case where Frankie may have been taken libel in court against Katie (who can represent Harvey as he is still classed as a child under the age of 16). Using the idea of publication, it appears that Frankie had defamed Harvey and his condition in a permanent way via the script and the audience that were watching when the comments were made. In a way it can be seen to have 'defamed' both Harvey and Katie, as Harvey's disability was joked about which caused him to be exposed to some hatred from Frankie Boyle. It also lowered Harvey in the eyes of the public by the way that his condition was made out to be lower than the public in order to cause a joke out of him for everyone. It also lowered Katie in the way that she was made out to not care about her son when 'arguing with Peter Andre'. Considering most issues have been covered with this case, to me it appears that Frankie Boyle used an attack towards Harvey (who was named) which was intended to be a 'dig' towards Katie Price. It also seems to be an unfair and rather inappropriate joke that 'crosses the line' between a funny joke and something that wouldn't even amuse the public as it offends not just Harvey, but many other disabled children around the world. Therefore I think that Frankie Boyle is libel to be sued by Katie Price on behalf of Harvey or should be made to make a public apology to Katie and Harvey Price along with anyone else he may have offended. (It's a shame he couldn't even be a man and make a formal apology, or try to realise the consequences of his comments towards a ill child.) 

Due to the comments made from Frankie, it inspired Katie Price into making a documentary 'Standing up for Harvey' which highlights the sensitive issue of his condition and the day to day medication and lifestyle both Harvey and Katie are used to due to the condition. It allows Harvey to be filmed in order to show the harsh reality of Harvey's condition and the ways in which Katie supports him and helps him to deal with it. In the programme Katie attempts to repeatedly to get Boyle to apologise for his vile comments. Katie felt that she should produce a programme as she stated, 'It is impossible to truly describe the disgust I felt when I heard this attack on Harvey. What's more, the vile suggestion that he could be guilty of rape was a swipe at not just my innocent son, but every disabled person in Britain - which is why I decided to invite the TV cameras into my home to defend Harvey and talk openly about him for the first time'  The programme focuses on mainly Harvey, however also on the bond between Katie and Harvey as mother and son, which is special as she is also like his carer. Katie is the one that gives Harvey over 10 lots of medication a day and continually has to tell him what is happening in his surroundings to prevent his autistic symptoms of violence when his routine is suddenly changed- and when she 'tells him he has had enough cake' The programme teaches society the reality of children's lifestyles that are ill or disabled and the pressure that it can put on the family without needing to be made a joke by a comedian. If you haven't seen this programme I recommend you do, as it does make us think how lucky we are and feel sympathy towards Harvey and other disabled children who will have been offended by these nasty comments. I personally believe Frankie should have received a fine or been made to apologise on his programme or to have made an appearance on Katie's documentary as she wanted him to. What do you believe?...