An imputation that a person 'supports the brutality' of a regime is materially different from an imputation that a person 'supports a regime that is brutal'. Where a broadcast portrays a person as refusing to accept allegations of brutality and blaming others for the situation, the broadcast is not capable of conveying that the person supports the regime's brutality. The word 'willingly' in an imputation of support for a brutal regime may connote knowing acceptance of the brutality and should not be used where the earlier ruling has determined that such knowledge cannot be imputed from the matter complained of.
The full text is available to signed-in members.