What a week The Daily Telegraph ‘s editor-at-large Garry Linnell had. He scores a Crikey tip of the hat and a wag of the finger for this week’s efforts.

Linnell had a great acerbic piece that sliced through the hypocrisy of activists fighting Canberra’s kanga cull. Pat O’Brien, leader of the National Kangaroo Protection Coalition, came in for a special serve.

“Nobody would seriously think that Australia has any right to criticise Japan for its whaling while we are killing 3½ million kangaroos every year for dog food,” said Pat. Well, said Linnell, “O’Brien’s passion is sadly not matched by his numeracy, or his logic”:

There are only about 70,000 humpback whales remaining on this planet. So far, there have been no reported sightings of them braving the drought and entering the Australian interior to graze on precious land reserved for livestock.

There are more than 50 million kangaroos in Australia.

And then there was yesterday’s Tania Zaetta story.

Someone leaked a high-profile document to The Tele about the Defence Department’s investigation into allegations Bollywood actor Zaetta had “fraternised” with troops while on a 17-day tour of duty.

Turns out that she should never have been named in the briefing.

While demonstrating that Linnell has contacts to envy, it was ultimately a prurient story that seems less likely to be true by the minute. Zaetta went on the front foot last night on A Current Affair, denying the allegations and noting she was in chats with lawyers. Meanwhile, the public interest case for the story was hardly overwhelming. In fact, it could act against the public interest, further reducing the talent pool of entertainers willing to put on a show for our diggers.

The Federal Government faces a potential compensation payout, writes Linnell today. Zaetta’s agent, Max Markson, suggests a defamation action against News Ltd is also a possibility. Still, we can only presume the Tele‘s lawyers ran a fine-tooth comb over this matter.

Damages, if a case is established, could be substantial. Apart from general reputational injury, Zaetta would have a pretty good case for special damages based on loss of future earnings, especially given that her career is based largely in conservative India. Markson, is estimating the loss at $1 million (naturally).

Defamation is the word being bandied about today but what about a breach of privacy action?

The right to privacy is a frontier area of media law — and one that’s anathema to many journalists — and although the High Court has said it could be upheld in some circumstances, the Zaetta case is unlikely to inspire it. (As an aside, the Australian Law Reform Commission is due to hand down its recommendations on the possibility of a tort of privacy on 30 May.)