Monday 9 May 2011

I'm getting a super injunction!

Oh my word! Super injunctions are hot news and I'm lovin' the person who is spilling the beans big time on twitter. But Jeremy Clarkson and Jemima Khan? No, that can't possibly be true. In Clarkson's dreams, maybe.

I plan to take out a super injunction next August. A gagging order on 'football' in my house. No one will be able to discuss it, watch it on television or even mention the word. I might even take out a few more. No one will be allowed to talk about or report to others on my cooking, driving skills or weight.

Unless you've been living on Pluto, you will all know that a super injunction is a gagging order in which the press is prohibited from reporting even the existence of an injunction.

It's a way the rich and famous can gag anyone from blabbing about their salacious affairs by preventing the media from reporting on them.

They say it's because they want to protect their privacy. Huh. Who are they kidding?

They don't give two hoots about their privacy when it makes them look good or earns them a few squillion. I don't see many of them slamming a super injunction on the press for reporting on them when they are caught shopping in Bond street or baring their bronzed chests on the beaches of Dubai.

No. Let's be real. All they care about is their image.

Thing is. Most of us don't give a flying fig about their image. And the rich and famous flatter themselves if they think we do. Our opinion of most of them won't be affected if we find out they are carrying on with someone other than their wife/husband/partner because most of us think they are talentless big-heads with egos the size of the Grand Canyon, anyway.

Personally, as far as footballers are concerned, finding out one of them is having a torrid affair will not change how I personally view them. They will always remain, in my opinion, over paid, egotistical wusses who drop to the floor and writhe in agony if so much as a feather brushes past them.

And they are ALL at. Andrew Marr, who has a face only a mother could love, took out a super injunction against The Independent newspaper for reporting on an extra-marital affair with a female journalist.

Here's a thought. If you don't want the press to report about your little affairs. Then DON'T have them. Do something different - be faithfull.

What kind of world do we live in when a person can go to jail for uttering the name of a super-injunction-protected-celebrity, yet a reckless driver who kills someone doesn't?

What would happen if an entire football stadium of people started chanting the celebrity's name? Would they all get arrested?

But seriously for a minute. Super injunctions have a far more sinister side to them. Sometimes the press are prevented from reporting on things that really matter. In 2009 the oil trader Trafigura prohibited the reporting of an internal report into the 2006 Cote D'Ivoire toxic waste dump scandal and that's something the public SHOULD have been told about.

Injunctions were not invented for celebrities by lawyers and judges. They were created by the Attorney General on behalf of the government to protect notorious criminals such as Mary Bell and the killers of James Bulger, whose crimes were so terrible that, if they were released, their safety could be in peril.

I understand an injuction when it's say for example, to prevent the press from reporting that Prince Harry is serving in Afghanistan. But to protect the image of a celebrity by supressing news of their sexual peccadillos, well that is just ridiculous.

But, whether you agree with them or not it seems that right now super injunctions are being handed out like confetti. Even as I write this today, two more celebrities have taken out super injunctions to prevent their behaviour becoming public knowledge. If I feel sorry for any celeb, it's the perfectly innocent celebrities who are being dragged into the scandals as people speculate the indentities.

It's now getting so ridiculous it's a joke.

Celebs/judges/football players/managers/politicians - listen! Save the thousands it costs you to slam a super injuction on the press because, quite honestly, WE JUST DON'T CARE - OKAY?

1 comment: