Friday 20 August 2010

Mail: Second England footballer wins injunction

Another England footballer has won a draconian injunction to gag the media from reporting revelations about his private life - the second in a week, the Daily Mail reports today.
The Mail reports: "The multi-millionaire, who cannot be named, is a father in a long-term relationship. He won the restrictive order last night banning a woman from publicising personal details about him."
A similar injunction was granted to another England international footballer last week after he discovered a Sunday tabloid was planning to run a story about his private life.
The Mail comments: "The latest example of media censorship will reignite the row over judge-made privacy laws which have never been approved by Parliament. Instead, the orders are based on judges' personal interpretation of human rights laws.
"Under the strict terms of the injunctions, neither of the footballers involved in this week’s actions can be named, despite the Daily Mail knowing who they are. Both orders were granted at the High Court in London by Mr Justice Nicol, on the grounds that the revelations would breach the footballers’ ‘right to a private and family life".
Breaching such an order could result in criminal prosecution for contempt of court.



Our CULTure must protect its demigods.

Anonymous said...

so, you think the press should have a right to publish tittle tattle and cause distress, anguish, embarrassment and upset to this person and his family, all in the name of 'entertainment'. This isn't Watergate; it's this spiteful, nasty obsession with hurting and damaging public figures which shows the media at its worst - it's insulting to the readership that we'd care more about some gossip than people dying in wars or disasters around the world. It's not news. A footballer plays football...that's all we should care about. the rest is none of our business. Again, let us state - this ISN'T Watergate but one day you'll be unable to report another Watergate because of these continuous abuses of freedom of speech.