Page 1 of 2
#1
So there's this great thing in England and Wales where celebrities can do something stupid and then go to a court and claim they have a right to privacy and if a judge agrees with them they are given a super injunction.

Everyone is then banned from mentioning who they are and what they did and even that there's any news they could be hinting at, except it doesn't apply in Scotland or anywhere else so you can easily find out anyway. Newspapers then like to let us know that the information has leaked but they are then banned from saying who leaked it or where you can read it.

MPs sometimes use "parliamentary privilege" to spill the beans but this week the speaker Bercow has said he's not allowing that any more. A while back, a Lib Dem MP used this right to break the Ryan Giggs super injunction.

There's one known to be in force at the moment, regarding "a well known couple in entertainment" as the Guardian bravely reports.

Is it just me, or is this bloody ridiculous in the internet age? Do other countries have such badly thought out laws?
#2
Celebrities do have a right to privacy though. We all fuck up sometimes. Working in the media doesn't mean it's ok for people to destroy your life when you fuck up in the same way everybody does.
#3
I don't disagree but this system clearly doesn't work - if it's not even enforceable in Scotland then there's no hope surely
#4
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Celebrities do have a right to privacy though. We all fuck up sometimes. Working in the media doesn't mean it's ok for people to destroy your life when you fuck up in the same way everybody does.

if someone was not born a celebrity, they have NO RIGHT to privacy, i intend to b a celebrity & acknowledge the risk
#5
Yeah, what celebrities get up to, as long as it's not illegal, is their own business and it's not 'in the public interest' for us to know about it.

The world would be a much better place if tabloid and shite magazines didn't go digging around in even slightly famous people's lives just because 'we have a right to know'. Why should anyone even care?
My old signature was too long. Have a daisy.

#6
Quote by RAB11
Yeah, what celebrities get up to, as long as it's not illegal, is their own business and it's not 'in the public interest' for us to know about it.

The world would be a much better place if tabloid and shite magazines didn't go digging around in even slightly famous people's lives just because 'we have a right to know'. Why should anyone even care?

This is the part I've never been able to grasp....who gives a shit about most stuff celebrities do? Yet, if a journo went digging through Joe Dirt's garbage to find out stuff about them, it would be labelled creepy.
Come back if you want to
And remember who you are
‘Cause there's nothing here for you my dear
And everything must pass
#7
Quote by smb
There's one known to be in force at the moment, regarding "a well known couple in entertainment" as the Guardian bravely reports.

Who gives a shit who Vernon Kay is banging though?
#8
I mean, I guess I understand the intention, but you European countries come up with the stupidest shit. Reminds me of the "right to be forgotten" bullshit.
#9
Quote by ALEXANDRIA7
if someone was not born a celebrity, they have NO RIGHT to privacy, i intend to b a celebrity & acknowledge the risk

Please tell me you are joking or mistyped that
A poem.
Quote by yoman297
no girl, movember isnt for you. shave your stache pls

I can out-bore you any day
#10
Quote by TheChaz
I mean, I guess I understand the intention, but you European countries come up with the stupidest shit. Reminds me of the "right to be forgotten" bullshit.

coming from an american
#11
Quote by sam b
coming from an american

I lost it at this
A poem.
Quote by yoman297
no girl, movember isnt for you. shave your stache pls

I can out-bore you any day
#12
Quote by ALEXANDRIA7
if someone was not born a celebrity, they have NO RIGHT to privacy, i intend to b a celebrity & acknowledge the risk



Why do you think this?


Something that sticks in my mind is that thing were a journo tried to sell Tulisa some cocaine so that he had evidence she was into it. Millions of people buy drugs but she was completely demonised just because she's in the media. Really unfair.
#13
Quote by sam b
coming from an american

I'll start....

SAVAGE
Come back if you want to
And remember who you are
‘Cause there's nothing here for you my dear
And everything must pass
#14
Quote by sam b
Who gives a shit who Vernon Kay is banging though?

Vernon Kaye isn't involved in this. Unless he's banging David Furnish.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#15
Quote by sam b
coming from an american

Sure the US has stupid laws, but the EU takes the cake when it comes to weirdass laws regarding freedom of speech. We're not the ones arresting people over twitter posts
#16
Quote by TheChaz
Sure the US has stupid laws, but the EU takes the cake when it comes to weirdass laws regarding freedom of speech. We're not the ones arresting people over twitter posts

But police in the EU would just arrest them, not shoot someone for making shit twitter posts while black.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#17
Quote by slapsymcdougal
But police in the EU would just arrest them, not shoot someone for making shit twitter posts while black.

I'll take things that have literally never happened for $2000, Alex.
#18
Quote by TheChaz
I'll take things that have literally never happened for $2000, Alex.

Well done, you've successfully recognised that American police shoot people just for being black!
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#19
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Well done, you've successfully recognised that American police shoot people just for being black!

Or that no police have ever shot any black person for a twitter post
#20
Quote by TheChaz at #33923021
Sure the US has stupid laws, but the EU takes the cake when it comes to weirdass laws regarding freedom of speech. We're not the ones arresting people over twitter posts


So a footballer got a lot of tweets last week from people saying they're gonna rape his toddler daughter. If they said that to him in the street they would probably get arrested, what's the difference when it's online?

And it's not like they're getting 20 years in jail, it's like 2 weeks at most and I can only find 2 examples of them ever going to jail.
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


Last edited by Trowzaa at Apr 12, 2016,
#21
Quote by smb

Is it just me, or is this bloody ridiculous in the internet age? Do other countries have such badly thought out laws?


We have name suppression in New Zealand courts and that can be given for heaps of different reasons. One being someone who is in the public eye as part of their profession.

I respect the idea of it. If you get charged but come out innocent on the other side its possible it will have a negative effect on your ability to generate income in some form or another and that I reckon is unfair.

In this case though, they engaged in a threesome. If its an actor it will be a positive, an actress, a negative (more likely to be anyway if they have any credibility and work major studio stuff). Chances are though this would be a negative for a male or a female if not in acting.
Last edited by Rebel Scum at Apr 12, 2016,
#22
It's just the Streisand Effect anyway
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#23
Quote by Trowzaa
So a footballer got a lot of tweets last week from people saying they're gonna rape his toddler daughter. If they said that to him in the street they would probably get arrested, what's the difference when it's online?

And it's not like they're getting 20 years in jail, it's like 2 weeks at most and I can only find 2 examples of them ever going to jail.


Yeah I'm in agreement.


Also tweeting bomb threats. It's not a big joke, it's a waste of time and resources. People need to know that's not ok.
#25
The issue with the super-injunction's is that they were being abused by the rich and famous. I'm not talking in terms of privacy, but in terms of freedom of the press - it meant that nothing could be written about *anything*. The way the law is constructed it should be the case that the press has freedom and if it is abused then it is held to account - i.e. through libel laws. There are times a super-injunction can be at least partially justified, but usually in relation to an ongoing case (to avoid compromising evidence).

Privacy is the most hypocritical issue of the 21st century - we flood the world with our personal information and then act surprised when it is misappropriated. We feel bad for celebrities getting hounded by the paparazzi, such as Amy Winehouse, whilst flipping through magazines with pictures of her tits hanging out as she throws up in Camden - then piously watch the documentary saying 'It was so terrible...how did it happen', still feeding off it. We demand absolute protection from terrorism, but expect full civil liberties - they can't both co-exist. [/rant]
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#26
Also, I had no idea about this particular one and have just wasted 10 minutes reading about it- only because I'm not supposed to. Now I feel lonely.....like A Candle In The Wind......
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#27
The issue of celebrity and privacy was brought up a few times in a few classes in uni. It was interesting because I was originally on the side that even celebrities have their right to privacy and would state my reasons why but my lecturer who is an absolute master at the issue tore me apart on the issue.

In short, we have to look at celebrities as being the ultimate image of the public interest, because to be a celebrity is to be within the public interest. You can be famous and not be a celebrity, but you can't be a celebrity without being somewhat famous. Celebrities are the sacrificial lambs that society has picked to make examples of. Some people will chase celeb status, some will not have a choice. It is is cruel but life isn't fair get over it.

Celebrities must accept their fate within society that they will have their privacy sacrificed for the sake of the public good. When we look at the behaviour of celebs like Katie Price, we as the public can respond in a (usually) disapproving manner or (unlikely) approving manner. We base their behaviour on what is and isn't acceptable in society, which is fundamentally in the public interest and for the public's good. Celebrities must be aware of their situation and be aware of the consequences of their actions as they will be accountable for mostly everything they do.

With this sacrifice of privacy comes the reward and benefits of being a celebrity and living the celebrity lifestyle.
Dance in the moonlight my old friend twilight


Quote by metal4eva_22
What's this about ****ing corpses? My UG senses were tingling.
#28
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Why do you think this?


Something that sticks in my mind is that thing were a journo tried to sell Tulisa some cocaine so that he had evidence she was into it. Millions of people buy drugs but she was completely demonised just because she's in the media. Really unfair.


Oh, the "it's ok because other people do it" defense. I'm guessing you learned that one during your stint as a teacher?

The "right" to privacy is much narrower than some people seem to think.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#29
Quote by Nero Galon
The issue of celebrity and privacy was brought up a few times in a few classes in uni. It was interesting because I was originally on the side that even celebrities have their right to privacy and would state my reasons why but my lecturer who is an absolute master at the issue tore me apart on the issue.

In short, we have to look at celebrities as being the ultimate image of the public interest, because to be a celebrity is to be within the public interest. You can be famous and not be a celebrity, but you can't be a celebrity without being somewhat famous. Celebrities are the sacrificial lambs that society has picked to make examples of. Some people will chase celeb status, some will not have a choice. It is is cruel but life isn't fair get over it.

Celebrities must accept their fate within society that they will have their privacy sacrificed for the sake of the public good. When we look at the behaviour of celebs like Katie Price, we as the public can respond in a (usually) disapproving manner or (unlikely) approving manner. We base their behaviour on what is and isn't acceptable in society, which is fundamentally in the public interest and for the public's good. Celebrities must be aware of their situation and be aware of the consequences of their actions as they will be accountable for mostly everything they do.

With this sacrifice of privacy comes the reward and benefits of being a celebrity and living the celebrity lifestyle.



And now playing Devil's Advocate:

What about people who don't pursue that lifestyle - Andrew Sachs' granddaughter, for example? Amy Winehouse is a great example, how would you explain/ justify that?

There is a fine balance and it is the duty of the law to manage it - all-powerful super-injunctions do not seem a just way. The bottom line is that as long as people continue to consume celeb-drivel there will be a proliferation of it.
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#30
Quote by Arby911
Oh, the "it's ok because other people do it" defense. I'm guessing you learned that one during your stint as a teacher?

The "right" to privacy is much narrower than some people seem to think.


That particular case says more about society treats substance use rather than the privacy issue.
Dance in the moonlight my old friend twilight


Quote by metal4eva_22
What's this about ****ing corpses? My UG senses were tingling.
#31
Quote by Arby911
Oh, the "it's ok because other people do it" defense. I'm guessing you learned that one during your stint as a teacher?

The "right" to privacy is much narrower than some people seem to think.


With Tulisa it is only her criminal activities that have kept her in the news - nothing to do with her media career - and this is exactly the point - a 'media career' now encompasses so much more.
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#32
Quote by Herr Rararr
With Tulisa it is only her criminal activities that have kept her in the news - nothing to do with her media career - and this is exactly the point - a 'media career' now encompasses so much more.


Certainly you can't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the commission of a crime?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#33
Quote by Herr Rararr
And now playing Devil's Advocate:

What about people who don't pursue that lifestyle - Andrew Sachs' granddaughter, for example? Amy Winehouse is a great example, how would you explain/ justify that?

There is a fine balance and it is the duty of the law to manage it - all-powerful super-injunctions do not seem a just way. The bottom line is that as long as people continue to consume celeb-drivel there will be a proliferation of it.


Didn't you see that I said that they don't have a choice in the matter? Celebrities are the chosen sacrifice of the public sphere, it reveals more about our culture as a species and how we depend on celebrities rather than how fair and just as a society we are.
Dance in the moonlight my old friend twilight


Quote by metal4eva_22
What's this about ****ing corpses? My UG senses were tingling.
#34
Quote by Nero Galon
Didn't you see that I said that they don't have a choice in the matter? Celebrities are the chosen sacrifice of the public sphere, it reveals more about our culture as a species and how we depend on celebrities rather than how fair and just as a society we are.



Love it - that reminds me of the South Park episode with Britney (Children of the Corn influenced). I think the key distinction you make is famous and celebrity, however would you describe either of the two examples I gave as celebrity over famous?

There are many examples of famous people / celebrities who manage to maintain their privacy whilst still fulfilling their cultural roles - if you can read an article in Rolling Stone about James Franco - highlights what someone can do if they choose to.
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#35
is this like that 'right to be forgotten' shit?
Check out my band Disturbed
#37
Meh, in the U.S. celebrities can get away with murder or manslughter O.J. Robert Blake, Vince Neal etc.

Although there is not much to prevent the media from skewering them
"A well-wound coil is a well-wound coil regardless if it's wound with professional equipment, or if somebody's great-grandmother winds it to an old French recipe with Napoleon's modified coffee grinder and chops off the wire after a mile with an antique guillotine!"
- Bill Lawrence

Come and be with me
Live my twisted dream
Pro devoted pledge
Time for primal concrete sledge

#38
Quote by Aeolian Harmony
I appreciate the Thomas Pynchon-style of celebrity. Excellent at doing a job, fairly reclusive but still with a family, prone to messing with people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanda_Tinasky) and playing around with the celebrity status.



Fascinating. Although it was Tom Hawkins.

What an end to the story too....bludgeoned his wife and then after a few days drove *her* car off a cliff ('well, if I'm gonna kill myself, don't wanna damage my Caddy...')
|
'....even the President of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked...."

Do me a favour, pop into Songwriting & Lyrics and add a comment to one thread, any thread, but contribute.

----

www.soundcloud.com/christobaldo
#39
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Celebrities do have a right to privacy though. We all fuck up sometimes. Working in the media doesn't mean it's ok for people to destroy your life when you fuck up in the same way everybody does.




This is a silly thread
Eat your pheasant
Drink your wine
Your days are numbered, bourgeois swine!
#40
Quote by Herr Rararr
Fascinating. Although it was Tom Hawkins.


Sigh, I know


What an end to the story too....bludgeoned his wife and then after a few days drove *her* car off a cliff ('well, if I'm gonna kill myself, don't wanna damage my Caddy...')



Sounds like a late-Beat-era writer gone berserk, doesn't it?
Page 1 of 2