Contact

Should we be covering something? Email us your ideas, rumours or comments.

The Right to Whip

Read more about: Uncategorized

I was delighted that Formula One boss, Max Mosley, won his case against the News of the World who paid one of his prostitutes to secretly film one of their orgies. The paper ran the headline “F1 boss has sick Nazi orgy with 5 hookers”. Mosley sued the paper for invasion of privacy. The paper argued the exposé was in the public interest.

Mosley had hired 5 prostitutes for a sadomasochistic orgy. But the court found there was no evidence for the allegation of Nazi undertones. More importantly it ruled that the public interest was not served by this severe invasion of the man’s private life.

The reason I’m delighted is that this is a slap in the face to the cheap, sordid, kiss and tell sleaze that has become the stock in trade of British tabloids.

I watched John Snow interview a legal guy from the News of the World. The guy from the paper was seething at this judgement. It was just so beautitful and satisfying to see him frothing at the mouth. He kept on repeating that the public ought to know about Mosley’s “Dark Secret Vice”. Really? Snow asked that, since the court found that there were no Nazi overtones, why should the public know about this mans sex life? Again, the answer was, when it comes to the “rich, the influential, or the powerful” we ought to know if they have a “Dark Secret Vice”. Well, snow asked, if we ought to know about the sex life of the rich and influential, should we know what the editor of the News of the World gets up to? Pause. Or it’s senior legals? Pause, and then “the editor perhaps, but not me” (Ooops, I hope that hooker last night wasn’t filming). You could hear the scratches from the bottom of the barrel.

The News of the World guy went on then to complain about the curtailment of freedom of speech creeping into Britain from Strasbourg. He was referring to the protection of privacy which is enshrined in the European convention on Human rights, which Britain signed in 1998. The convention doesn’t provide an absolute right to privacy, but, basically, specifies that privacy should be protected unless there are genuine public interest concerns.

Let’s be clear: freedom of speech is vital, and the function of the press in investigating matters of public interest is essential to democracy. But the interesting thing here is that the British court looked at the various provisions, took into account the European convention and made a judgement that is both fair and sensible. And the court explicitly stated that it believes its ruling will not curb the power of the press to conduct its work in matters of genuine public interest.

All said, a sound ruling. And just so great to see the vile, despicable, and debased rubbish that is the British tabloid, getting what it deserves: a whipping.

6 Responses to “The Right to Whip”

  1. # Comment by Anne Jul 25th, 2008 12:07

    Couldn’t agree more. This was salacious, invasive journalism at its worst. I think the developing right to privacy in English jurisprudence (whatever caveats there were in the judgement about this not changing the current situation)is very welcome. I was also taken by Max Mosley’s argument that since the Nazis reminded him of his parents, he would never have an orgy with fascist overtones as the last thing you want when you are having sex, is to be reminded of your parents. I thought that this had the ring of truth about it.

  2. # Comment by P O'Neill Jul 25th, 2008 12:07

    Wasn’t Michael McDowell trying to bring a privacy right into Irish media legislation? I’ve lost track of what happened to that initiative.

  3. # Comment by Tomaltach Jul 25th, 2008 13:07

    I think Lenihan became minister for Justice and shelved the Privacy Bill.

  4. # Comment by Donagh Jul 25th, 2008 16:07

    Well, the Privacy Bill was shelved to allow for the press to regulate itself through the Press Council, but Lenihan still brandished the stick, while offering the carrot:

    In a February 2008 update to the Irish Chapter to the Association of European Journalists survey Joe Carroll writes:

    “The Irish Minister for Justice, Brian Lenihan, has warned that if the media do not respect privacy under the new Press Ombudsman and Press Council he will go ahead and bring in a stricter law to ensure rights to privacy. He gave the warning at the formal launch of the Press Council on January 9th 2008.

    It’s also discussed in an Irish Left Review interview with Chekov Feeney which is all about the Defamation Bill, the Press Council and the media in general.

    And of course, there’s much more about the Defamation Bill, on Eoin O’Dell’s blog. The bill was debated before the Dail earlier in the year but still is not any where near making it into law.
    http://www.cearta.ie/category/defamation/

  5. # Comment by Dan Sullivan Jul 25th, 2008 16:07

    I strongly suspect that the ‘Nazi’ reference was simply a tabloid shorthand for German. After all in their view all Germans that have ever lived throughout history are Nazis.

    Best summing up of the tabloids was Russell Howard on Mock the Week last week where he was talking about the depressing state of the media, in reference to the Sun he said “Are you a paedo?, are you a paedo?, have a bang at her tits, 16 today! are you a paedo?”

  6. # Comment by Dan Sullivan Jul 31st, 2008 15:07

    I found the clip of Russell Howard’s piece http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo0drBdU6lM worth watching.

Post a comment below:

Get Irish Election updates via email. Enter your email address:

Latest Links of Interest

Links Feed Links Archives »