Celebrity Injunction Fiasco

I’ve been seeing these interminable references to “the celebrity” who has managed to get an injunction, gagging the British media from reporting details of him and his partner’s private lives. Initially, I didn’t give a damn. But when I read that Scottish and American – no, wait, everywhere except England, actually – media had reported it I became inquisitive.A puzzle with a volcano underneath it

It turned out to be bloody easy to find out who it was about, and when it eventually breaks – which is inevitable, given that the injunction looks like it is going to be lifted anyway – you’ll see what a disgusting, seedy mess it is.

At present, only the initials PJS and YMA can be used to identify the main people involved. Neither set of initials is real. However, other people ARE involved. And when you find out who the story is about, that’s when you’ll realise how tragic this whole thing really is.

Celebrities have every right to be left alone. Unfortunately, just by being a celebrity means that unless you live a squeaky clean life, you’re not going to be left alone. The gutter press will hound you over every crack in the pavement you step on. And when something which is as awkward as this one is – with its many implications concerning those involved (and various taboo subjects) – there is no way it isn’t going to go public. Eventually.


Well, the appeal has been upheld – so far. The Sun isn’t at all happy, and neither is the Mail, which has found a slightly different way of dealing with the issue (albeit, in a way which means when it breaks the fallout will be that much worse). There’s some clever word play in both accounts, which make more sense when you know who it is they’re referring to.

Lord Mance said… there was “no public interest (however much it may be of interest to some members of the public) in publishing kiss-and-tell stories or criticisms of private sexual conduct, simply because the persons involved are well-known”.

Former Lib Dem MP John Hemming… said he was surprised by the ruling.

“The logical conclusion of this is that gossip about anyone with children will become a criminal offence subject to a potential penalty of two years’ imprisonment,” he said.

Trust me, there’s a lot more going on here than just that. It’s a form of enforced propaganda of the kind copiously referenced in Orwell’s 1984.

Seriously, you can find it in dozens of online publications with just a few clicks (and a page scroll or two). And the only reason it is in any way interesting is because of the cack-handed attempts to prevent it becoming known.


Incidentally, if you type “google.com/ncr” in your browser address bar you stay with Google.com – not Google.co.uk, which effectively censors out stuff you aren’t meant to see in the UK. The “ncr” stands for “no country redirect”, and it’s a good way of finding news from other countries. You still get UK stuff, but you get a lot more besides.

(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)