No, just a Shilling (sic!) is all it takes to deny freedom of speech and the expectation that those who put themselves forward as role models will act accordingly.
All it takes is money, and an admiring public's gaze, to render those 'celeb's' who break marriage vows, and betray trust (private and public), free from discovery thanks to the wonderful world of injunctions and even 'super injunctions'. It appears that the world of free speech and role models is to finally be laid to rest as, perhaps fatally, the law is seen to be one rather gigantic ass!
Schillings, representing the wonderful world of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) known as CTB, TSE and ELP and demanding that Twitter divulge names of those who have posted be made known, fight equally for those they represent to remain anonymous - funny world isn't it?
The law should be applied equally to all and just as I applauded Moseley's failure to use the law to conceal his acts I am saddened that the law is putting itself forward as a body that is out of touch and ridiculous in the way the injunctions have been graned.
I wonder how many Blackpool fans will find themselves arrested for breach of the injunction if they sung about a certain Man U player?
Still, at least he's proved he can score away from home!
Pax
2 comments:
Vic,
I find it quite sad that because of someone's status in life, we feel the need to pry and peek and to share every aspect of their life, good and bad.
The media are partly to blame, seeking to increase income by spying and reporting any misdeeds, but people are also to blame by their seeming wish to share and to gloat over the misfortunes of others.
We put people on pedestals and then take aim to knock them down. A little like the Stocks of old, where shaming and humiliation was the punishment for such actions.
What we fail to perceive or to appreciate is the harm and pain caused to others, but also the harm and hurt we are doing to our own souls.
People excuse this by saying it's only human nature, but if that's their human nature, give me an animal any day.
It's time we sought other ways to deal with these issues. If the soccer player in question was Joe Bloggs from down the road, nobody would be interested. Their actions would be on their conscience and the harm caused would be privately borne, much preferable to the current media circus and speculation.
Why can't we respect the privacy of EVERYONE?
To one who has lived for many years with the "Freedom of the Press" libel laws of the US, the UK's laws, which already strongly favoured the rights of the plaintiff, seem pretty punitive (London, one gathers, is now the venue of choice for libel cases). The gag orders, which for obvious reasons benefit only the rich, tip the balance even more wildly in the direction of the plaintiff with the deep pocket.
That said, if Giggs was indeed the victim of attempted extortion, surely the blackmail laws on the books are up to dealing with it
Post a Comment