« Play for f*@kin' today | Summertime and my train's a fiasco... »
@ 2008-07-24 – 11:12:33
It's a very odd world at times.
Very strange indeed.
I used to work with ex Daily Star staff who would hang their heads at the mention of a certain MP. They swore blind they were right and he was pulling a fast one.
I expect the News of the World editorial team are having a less than great morning today. Although £60,000 damages to Max Mosely probably speaks volumes.
rowtheboat
deana24
He sounds lovely, doesn't he.
And so good at taking responsibility for his own actions.
rowtheboat
Papers are often too invasive when it comes to peoples' private lives - and too good at exaggeration, which I hate.
But him getting on his high horse about his poor dear wife being upset is ridiculous.
deana24
I loved his arguement that had NoW not revealed his S&M activities she would never have found out. What is it people say when they get married, something about fidelity... I'm sure it's in the script somewhere...
rowtheboat
Maybe they wrote their own vows.
"I promise to love, honour and cheat on you innumerable times in rampant S&M sessions with prostitutes..."
SeasideMan
Pro I like this verdict. The papers shouldn't be peering into what people do in private and I hope it curbs some of their worst excesses. But it's a sad reflection of the modern world that people want to read about the private activities of the rich and famous rather than about genuinely important news.
Tom.
deana24
It's a grey area though, isn't it. If it had been the case that he were taking part in Nazi-themed anything (which this court case failed to find evidence of, she says hastily) then that would have been in the public interest. The fact that it took place during an S&M session involving five women would have been by-the-by.
But ultimately people love scandal and always have done. It's just human nature. And in a society so obsessed with celebrity news it's only ever going to get worse. Sorry, Tom!
SeasideMan
Pro No, I don't think it's a grey area at all. I totally agree with the judge that "he could expect privacy for consensual "sexual activities (albeit unconventional)", whether it was Nazi themed or not (and it was not in this case).
There has been a change though: 30 or 40 years ago, the papers chose not to do this sort of thing so much. Now, they all do it, which is why I think this is the right verdict.
Tom.
deana24
Then we must agree to differ because there is no room for celebrating fascism in my book - in private, in public or in deep space.
Juzzzy
The damages awarded reflect the judge's utter distaste for Mosley's actions.
I have no doubt he'll be all over the news hailing this a "great victory" for privacy but the award tells you it's anything but.
It's a rap across the NoW knuckles - deserved, because it was private - but a mere rap nonetheless.
Deana, I'm with you: I wonder what the verdict would have been had he been with black prostitutes and calling them "niggers"? Would that be "okay" because it was in private? No, of course not.
And yes, I'm biased.
Zeds - ex-Daily Mirror staff
SeasideMan
Pro I support people's right to behave in any manner they feel like, as long as it's consensual and doesn't hurt anyone. Much as I personally dislike the racist attitudes of the BNP and other fascist parties, their right to exist and believe what they like is fundamental to the freedom of our society. If those freedoms are curtailed in any way, then we become fascistic ourselves.
Tom.
kendersrule
Pro only £60000? interesting!
rubychoo
Certainly nowhere near the damages Mosely was looking for.
And it did look as though there were at least undertones of Nazi brutality going on... although he said it was generalized jailer/prisoner fantasy enactment...
So that's alright then ...
ajnspencer
Pro It's definately a little sidenote that he only got that much...
thehomelyyear
Pro What a debate you have started!!
deana24
I love it when we discuss things!
carlosf
My take on the press, is that a great number of "celebs" use the press when they want publicity (hence the vast mountain of OK/Hello/Now and other carbon copy picturebooks), then moan to high heaven when caught knickerless, or falling out of a cab. Without the constant battery of photos of them attending the opening of a wallet, would half of them even be known?
As for Mad Max, for some strange reason, I keep seeing re-runs of Allo Allo....
deana24
I think you're right, you can't have your cake and eat it (unless you are Row, Soy and Juzzy and have a gu pud in front of you). If celebs want to sell their weddings and baby pictures they are in no position to call 'foul' (or indeed 'wolf') when they're caught out.
Perhaps this economic downturn will wake us up and society will realise its fascination with all things cheap and glittery is poiontless. Or maybe that's why celebrity culture is so huge; it's what we use to distract ourselves from the alternative media images of war, famine and suffering. Hmmm...
Related posts
The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.
"He told the court that the publicity had been "totally devastating" for his wife of 48 years, and he could think of "nothing more undignified or humiliating" for his two sons to experience."
All the fault of the papers, obviously.