1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Footballer sues Twitter in vain attempt to stop truth

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Ph4ZeD, 20 May 2011.

  1. adam_bagpuss

    adam_bagpuss Have you tried turning it off/on ?

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    4,231
    Likes Received:
    150
    whats gets me is that giggs had an affair and now because of this stupid ass law someone could go to jail !!!!!

    yeah that makes sense - immoral action causes innocent man to go to jail !

    i know justice is becoming something rare but this is a joke
     
  2. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,571
    Likes Received:
    168
    The level of civil disobedience in this case makes me suspect that that probably won't happen. Although the judiciary seems to be completely out of touch here, the general public and the media seem to be aligned in general with the idea that this whole injunction thing is all really rather disgusting and should be put to death for good.

    All we need to happen is for lawyers and the judiciary, and perhaps some adulterers to realise that you can't censor the net. Better authoritarians have tried (China) and failed.
     
  3. leveller

    leveller Yeti Sports 2 - 2011 Champion!

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    24
    SuperInjunctions are evil. We start with a law that 'protects' people and then that law is eventually used by corporations to cover-up their evil'doings.

    Corporation is a great documentary btw.
     
  4. BRAWL

    BRAWL Dead and buried.

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    Would more say, individual's for their wrong doings. A company can still be held accountable if their actions are significantly amoral. Well accountable by the general public. Sure Nexxo will batter that one into next year... no Nexxo that wasn't a challenge :p

    How dare people (they aren't gods, despite the ego as said earlier.) think they can censor the entire internet/nation against something they don't want discussing. Personally I'd just have the discussion and rename the chap in question "He who should not be named" and still publish the story!
     
  5. Ending Credits

    Ending Credits Bunned

    Joined:
    4 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    5,288
    Likes Received:
    232
    Despite public opinion, big corporations aren't inherently evil. People working for them and running them aren't faceless or evil demons, they're people like you or me with morals like you or me. Yes there are some henious (and some very henious) practices going on but that's your equivalent of a dodgy builder. People are too quick to shun large corporations that would do them far more good than harm nowadays.

    I do agree with transparency though; just because you make £x bn a year doesn't put above anyone else which seems to be a common excuse.

    Personally I believe individuals do have a right for details about their private life to remain private though. Does it really affect the general public that Mr Higgs screwed Miss Thomas?
     
  6. Brooxy

    Brooxy Like a boss (but not a boss)

    Joined:
    20 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    109
    Y'know what? As far as newspapers go, censoring the affairs of footballers can be a good thing. It means the papers would need to fill the empty space with something interesting :p
     
  7. Da_Rude_Baboon

    Da_Rude_Baboon What the?

    Joined:
    28 Mar 2002
    Posts:
    4,082
    Likes Received:
    135
    Yes they do have a right to privacy but they also live their lives in the public eye and they know exactly what that means. The man in question knew very well that the media would jump on any infidelity but he did it anyway. Although I would expect he would have thought about his wife and kids first. Celebrities use the the media to promote themselves and earn money. They can't take all the benefits and expect none of the negatives.

    As the pundit on Sky(?) News rather succinctly put it in reference to Max Mosely... "if famous people do not want to be on the front page of the papers than they should not pay prostitutes to shove dildos up their bottoms."
     
  8. tristanperry

    tristanperry Active Member

    Joined:
    22 May 2010
    Posts:
    916
    Likes Received:
    41
    FINALLY!!

    An MP (John Hemming, Lib Dem) just used his Parlimentary Priviledges to 'out' Ryan Giggs' super injunction.

    This means that the media can now - finally - report about the worst kept secret of the past week.

    Seeing MPs going against the old fashioned judges views on injunctions is never a bad thing ;)

    It was Guido Fawkes, and yep, on Sky News.
     
  9. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg New Member

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    Speaking of out of touch Judges....

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13491086

    Normally i've some degree of respect for some (mostly professional) members of the Lords but this chap sounds like he's just chucking his toys.
     
  10. leveller

    leveller Yeti Sports 2 - 2011 Champion!

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    24
    :eyebrow:

    We are not allowed to do anything illegal online and if we do then we suffer at the hands of the law, which suits us fine. Therefore it is not "totally out of control". But now we're not allowed to talk about a footballer having an affair?!

    It (wikileaks, this, etc etc) could be adding-up to forthcoming censorship on the internet?
     
  11. Ph4ZeD

    Ph4ZeD New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    143
    Hes been named in parliament and its now all over the papers. Game over Mr Giggs!
     
  12. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
  13. BRAWL

    BRAWL Dead and buried.

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    184
    They'll be coming out the goddamn walls!

    and just in case he wasn't listening he just got his ass kicked back there...

    Mr Giggs, please become the meme of the week.
     
  14. Ending Credits

    Ending Credits Bunned

    Joined:
    4 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    5,288
    Likes Received:
    232
    What I don't like is that it hold famous people to a higher standard for no reason and do we really expect the likes of footballers to live to a higher standard? The same goes for good publicity as well; Posh and Becks expecting, well that's nice but it really doesn't matter on the face of things.
     
  15. stonedsurd

    stonedsurd Is a cackling Yuletide Belgian

    Joined:
    11 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    7,776
    Likes Received:
    303
    We're not holding them to a higher standard. No one is condoning or condemning his affair (as far as I'm aware), they're just cheesed off at a law (which doesn't work) that protects the privileged.

    As an aside, many have pointed out that public figures should simply accept media scrutiny.
     
  16. Da_Rude_Baboon

    Da_Rude_Baboon What the?

    Joined:
    28 Mar 2002
    Posts:
    4,082
    Likes Received:
    135
    I agree. None of it matters and all of us make indiscretions from time to time and have parts of our lives we want to keep private. The difference is they know the press is casting their beedy little eyes on them looking for a scandal and people can profit from it.
     
  17. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,355
    Likes Received:
    1,762
    Celebrities make a living out of being in the public eye. They use the media as a tool for publicity and exposure. Footballers and pop stars similarly make a handsome living out of the celebrity status and role modelling that their 'job' confers. It's not as if they get on the field or stage, do their game/gig and then go back home to lead private and unassuming lives like most people do. Publicity is an integral tool of their trade.

    If you make your living projecting an image to the public and being a role model, then there's a price tag attached. You have to be careful to uphold that image and be the role model. It comes with the job. You are held to a higher standard, just like teachers are, and doctors, police officers, firemen, therapists and indeed judges and politicians; people in positions of power and trust and influence; people who make a living by representing an institution, a public interest or a culturally valued role. To not be mindful of that fact is simply unprofessional.

    So yes, Giggsy knew that he is in the public eye. He makes a very good living off that. Knowing this, he should learn to be discreet. That is his responsibility, not that of the media.
     
  18. LJF

    LJF Modded

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    129
    Likes Received:
    7
    But he doesn't. It's my understanding that Giggs actively avoids publicity and attention like this. It's probably the main reason he thought taking out the injunction was a good idea.

    He may (or may not) have had an affair with a z-list celebrity (i'm not decided on it, nor do I really care). So what!? What really worries me is that the media believe that people should know and care about it, as though they're performing a public service.

    I read a story in the Metro the other day that was simply a regurgitation of a glossy magazine interview. Such pathetic journalism. In it Imogen's 'sister' said that she wasnt eating because of the stress and that she'd turned to drink. If this is the case then she's only herself to blame. She shouldn't have attempted to sell her story to the press to make money and in turn Giggs wouldnt have taken out the injunction. No one would have known about it.
    The fact that her publicist is none other than Max Clifford severely reduces her credibility in my eyes.
     
  19. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,355
    Likes Received:
    1,762
    Giggsy should know that having an affair with a Z-list celebrity is not "avoiding publicity and attention". He knows that he is in the public eye; that people will be watching, and that rightly or wrongly (and I would argue not entirely wrongly, given that he is a role model and he knows it) they care about the moral standards of his behaviour.

    I think I see a way out of this: if you don't want people to gossip about you having affairs, then don't have any affairs.
     
  20. Pieface

    Pieface Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    134
    Well, the rumours going around are the reason Giggs was taking out the Super Injunction was to stop her blackmailing him. And yet she's blackmailing him and trying to look a victim in the papers.

    But yes, Max Clifford /facepalm
     

Share This Page