★★★★★ 0/5

House of Hancock disclaimer, but Gina Rinehart will now sue Nine.

Nine's "highly defamatory" miniseries will be heading back to the court room.

12
Leave a comment

IMG_1539Nine included a Disclaimer last night in Part 2 of its House of Hancock miniseries conceding “Some events in this program have been fictionalised for dramatic purposes.”

But despite hurried lawyer meetings between Nine and Gina Rinehart on Saturday to agree on edits and a disclaimer, The Australian reports today that Mrs. Rinehart will now sue Nine over factual errors in the miniseries.

A statement from Rinehart’s office said, “As a show it has denigrated the memory of her late father and attempted to depict highly personal events in a fictionalised and dramatised way while maintaining that it is a ‘true’ story. The House of Hancock is replete with falsehoods, some knowing and deliberate and is highly defamatory.”

Around 4 minutes was excised from the drama last night, creating an abrupt ending for viewers.

Corrected.

12 Responses

  1. Hilarious. One can only hope Nine demonstrates some intestinal fortitude and resists the usual lazy lawyers’ advice to settle. Rinehart is clearly deluded both about how the media and the law works. There may have been dramatic license and minor inaccuracies aplenty, but she’ll have a very tough time proving that they amount to defamation. She’s a public figure, and fair game. The story is substantially true, and most of the key facts are verifiable. And she’s the wealthiest woman in the country, so financial damages are meaningless. No court is going to be sympathetic. And a trial will only air all her dirty laundry anew – and there’s plenty of that. She’ll do way more damage to her reputation than House of Hancock managed.

      1. I understand that. Just feel that Reinhardt may not have felt the need to sue if Nine had made that small gesture. However, she did take her own children to court so perhaps it was always going to happen.

      2. It can’t defame Lang Hancock because he’s dead.
        Nor it is a problem that its fictionalised, its a drama. The fact that Nine didn’t put a disclaimer on the first episode was just incredibly lazy.

        Gina isn’t claiming that she’s been defamed. A lot of this is just Gina using her power trying to stop coverage of the court case — which is a matter of public record since the judge rejected her attempts to keep it secret.

  4. Know this was a television programme but as it was stated as being a true story when in fact it was obviously not, then I think I would feel the same about suing the company. If all the people that this series was about had died and nobody could really verify the true facts then that would be different but in this instance its not the case. So many “true stories” advertised are so far away from the truth its not funny its all done to get ratings.

  5. Rinehart suing will do more to hurt her reputation than any misrepresentations in this mini series. If I recall she sued her own kids over money so for me this is just another reminder of what greed can do.

Leave a Reply