Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sinister

Super Injunctions

26 posts in this topic

Gagging the media, or properly protecting private lives? We're hearing about injunctions and so-called super-injunctions more than ever, but are they changing the way celebrities are reported? The BBC's legal affairs correspondent Clive Coleman has been finding out...

Are the rich and powerful increasingly using injunctions and so-called super-injunctions to gag the press from publishing stories about their private lives?

No one really knows, especially in the case of 'super-injunctions', where the media is prevented from revealing even the fact that an injunction has been granted.

The media, and in particular the tabloid press, are extremely worked up about the issue of injunctions. They see these protective court orders as a bar to free speech.

This guy baited himself today:

_52338065_011367490-1.jpg

BBC presenter Andrew Marr has revealed he took out a super-injunction to protect his family's privacy - but says he will not pursue it any further.

Mr Marr told the Daily Mail he was "embarrassed" about the gagging order he took out in 2008 to suppress reports of an affair with a fellow journalist.

"I did not come into journalism to go around gagging journalists," he said.

Private Eye editor, Ian Hislop, said Mr Marr, as a journalist himself, had been a "touch hypocritical".

Mr Marr's comments follow a number of recent injunctions which have banned the identification of celebrities.

Mr Hislop, who has twice challenged Mr Marr's super-injunction, said: "As a leading BBC interviewer who is asking politicians about failures in judgment, failures in their private lives, inconsistencies, it was pretty rank of him to have an injunction while working as an active journalist.

"He knows that and I'm very pleased he's come forward and said 'I can no longer do this'."

In his interview in the Mail, Mr Marr said injunctions seemed to be "running out of control" and he confirmed he had taken one himself to prevent the publication of details about the affair, which happened eight years ago while he was BBC political editor.

At the time he believed he had fathered a child with the woman, but later found out through a DNA test this was not the case.

What is the point really when you got the internet and it getting out anyway.

The other one doing the rounds is this thing:

imogen_thomas_2.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point really when you got the internet and it getting out anyway.

The other one doing the rounds is this thing:

imogen_thomas_2.jpg

edited to make it have more sense.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty, I don't see what right journalists have in exposing celebrities who have affairs.

Fine if it is a politician/high ranking public sector worker, otherwise I just think they take it too far.

And most importantly, there is far more important news stories to bloody print

/

Haha at the Edit.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imogen thomas from big brother

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giggs and kevin davies are the two names which keep popping up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giggs and kevin davies are the two names which keep popping up.

UUMMMMMMM

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol I remember that was one of the few BBs I watched, swear she used to cuss out them Nuts type model girls on the show but as soon as she got out she was the first one on it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard gigg's name

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be illegal for me to care any less

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL at her all crying on This Morning right now.

She's getting basically called a slag in the best pre watershed way possible. She's so hot though

Surely no need for an injunction now though cos if everyone know's then surely G*ggs' wife will

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what can anyone apply for one of these?

on what grounds could he justify it?

thats bullshit

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely no need for an injunction now though cos if everyone know's then surely G*ggs' wife will

The injunction will stay cos as if they want their kids to know, or external family members, and cos while its off the front pages his image is maintained.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The media, and in particular the tabloid press, are extremely worked up about the issue of injunctions. They see these protective court orders as a bar to free speech.

SMH

Isn't that contradicting privacy laws or suttin? Getting up all in peoples business.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: obviously tabloids will be gutted if they cant print so much gossip

that might in a way be a good thing

hopefully put katie f*ckin price out of business

but where does the right to privacy begin and end?

affairs can be kept under wraps, what about a minor criminal conviction? do you have the right to that being kept private and only disclosed to the authorities and relevant bodies?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right to privacy and the right to public knowledge has always conflicted.

Superinjunctions would actually increase the Katie Price nonsense, as celebs that seek attention & have national interest would have to fill the pages we lose in scandal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: obviously tabloids will be gutted if they cant print so much gossip

that might in a way be a good thing

hopefully put katie f*ckin price out of business

but where does the right to privacy begin and end?

affairs can be kept under wraps, what about a minor criminal conviction? do you have the right to that being kept private and only disclosed to the authorities and relevant bodies?

TBH, that's the whole issue right there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right to privacy and the right to public knowledge has always conflicted.

Superinjunctions would actually increase the Katie Price nonsense, as celebs that seek attention & have national interest would have to fill the pages we lose in scandal.

:blink:

never considered that

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've had your wedding serialized in a magazine/newspaper and you cheat, you should got no f*ck*ng grounds for a super injuntion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In his defence...

WELSH football legend Ryan Giggs has hit out at players who cash in on their celebrity status.

Manchester United veteran Giggs, 34, hit out at greedy stars for selling big-money deals about their private lives to magazines such as OK!

And while manager Alex Ferguson still leaves him quaking in his boots, he admitted that he was more scared of his mum, Lynne.

Ely-born Giggsy, who shuns the limelight away from football, was especially critical of mega-rich players who flog coverage of their weddings.

Asked if they do it for fame or money, the dad of two replied: “I think the money.”

“Where does it stop? You get offered money for your wedding, then for your kids, new houses, holidays.

“We earn enough from football and sponsorships, why do you need any more? It’s tempting but you have to make choices.”

Giggsy contrasted his own wedding to Stacey Cooke, which had nine guests, to Wayne Rooney’s glitzy marriage to Coleen McLoughlin, where there were 150 guests and a £2.5m deal for photographic rights with OK!

Ryan, who missed Wayne’s ceremony as he was best man at a friend’s wedding the next day, said: “Those kind of weddings are not for me.”

In his interview with GQ magazine, he also spoke of the contrast with former team-mate David Beckham, whose marriage to Posh Spice plunged him into a media circus.

“Becks was always comfortable with it,” he said. “I can’t think of anything worse.”

He said he often had to stifle a chuckle when he sees the younger players rolling up in their Lamborghinis and Ferraris.

Giggs, who drives an Audi estate, said: “They’re going to learn the hard way about losing money on cars and buying suits and only wearing them once. When I was younger I bought Porsches and Ferraris, clothes, booze and so on. These days, I spend my money on my house, holidays and school fees.”

Having been at Manchester United since he was a child, nobody has seen more of Alex Ferguson’s famous hairdryer treatment rants than Giggsy, who passed Bobby’s Charlton’s club record of 758 appearances in the Champions League final.

The Scottish manager is renowned for his fearsome tirades at players he believes haven’t met his expectations.

Fergie even famously threw a football boot at then England captain Beckham, leaving him with a gash above the eye – an incident Giggs remembers well.

He said: “It missed me by inches on the way through. It was unbelievable.

“But the manager knows how to get the best out of everyone, whether it’s putting his arm around them or the hairdryer.”

Giggs first caught the attention of Sir Alex as a youngster playing on park pitches in Manchester.

But despite his huge potential, he did not escape the occasional blast from his boss.

Giggs recalled: “The manager would watch me when I was 13, 14 and I’d get the hairdryer treatment.

“My attitude was always ‘right, I’ll show him he’s wrong’.

“He’d shout at everything he could think of as loudly as he could – telling you how badly you’d played and you’d never play for the club again.”

But despite all the shouting, it is his mum, Lynne, below, who Giggs says really knows how to stick the boot in.

“She’ll say, ‘you were rubbish today, Ryan’.

“She’s watched me play more than anyone, so yes, she knows what she’s talking about.”

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I was surprised that Giggs indulged in this kind of behaviour tbh

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty, I don't see what right journalists have in exposing celebrities who have affairs.

Fine if it is a politician/high ranking public sector worker, otherwise I just think they take it too far.

And most importantly, there is far more important news stories to bloody print

agree

who even wants to know these people are having affairs

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0