Saturday, January 19, 2008

Publish and be damned?

I see Guido has been naughty and published the names of a broadcast journalist and two commentators in a matter The Skimmer says is covered by an injunction. Mind you, Guido says the failure to write about the story is more about a wall of silence amongst journalists rather than it being about an injunction that exists to stop it being reported.

The story does involve the parentage of a kid though, well I presume that the child is still a minor anyway, so it may just be a child protection issue more than anything else. At least that is what I imagine the court would probably say its reasons for an injunction is anyway.

26 comments:

JuliaM said...

Oh, not sure about this....

There's a child involved, and it's not the childs fault it's biological parents have the morals of alley cats and the wifeswapping habits of Roman senators.

Besides, to break a story like this needs some kind of 'public interest' and I really can't see any here. Ask the average man in the street, and he may know the father (from TV) but is unlikely to have heard of the two women involved.

Plus, this gives that raving nutjob Ireland a chance to get up on his hind legs and act 'moral' over it, and that's usually a bad thing (if bloody entertaining!) because it helps his chances of regulation for the net..

Not wise, Guido, not wise at all.

Barnacle Bill said...

I'm glad Mr. Fawkes did post the names of the journalists involved.
It opened my eyes up to how slippery the MSM is becoming.
I was going to use "incentuous" but as there are minors present I refrained.

canvas said...

I don't see the 'public interest' in this story.

mike said...

"I see Guido has been naughty" Grow up, this was not news or important. It was just a little bit nasty, not just a little bit naughty.

dizzy said...

Growing up is over-rated.

Unsworth said...

Date of the injuction?

Roadrunner said...

We should have more of this so that the public can see and judge the people who have influence over the rest of us.GO TO IT GUIDO.

mike said...

Roadrunner said...
Bit silly if you allow these folk to influence you. "GO TO IT GUIDO" and in capitals, impressive post. So you believe Guido to be a good influence then ? What do you know about him ? What does he do ? Did you see him on Newsnight wearing a sack ? Have you got a job ? Have you ever had a job ? We need to know so as to make sense of your incredibly naive comments.

mike said...

Barnacle Bill said... It opened my eyes
You thought they were somehow different than the rest of us did you Barny ?

Ear Miles said...

Damm. I always thought that Marr was a wanker.

roadrunner said...

It would seem that if you make a comment which does not meet with "Mike said's"approval, he assumes your an idle layabout.WHAT AN ARROGANT TOSSER.You are right in one respect.I do not have a job, I am retired having paid my dues for fifty years of work.What is more, if you think Marr's interview of Brown was not done to influence people then it is you who are naive.As for Guido, Newsnight was not his finest moment but his uncovering of Hain was pretty damn smoky,and long may he continue to reveal the corrupt hypocritical bastards in positions of power.

Little Black Sambo said...

Life without Guido would be much more BORING so thank heavens he is so irrepressible.

mike a pensioner said...

roadrunner said. WHAT AN ARROGANT TOSSER.
What is it with you and capitals for gods sake ? "his uncovering of Hain" pardon ? his ? now your just being daft."Marr's interview of Brown was not done to influence people" I think you misunderstand the idea behind this kind of thing Roady, that is why Brown does this stuff, bet you thought he did it for a laugh, Silly Billy. Don't play the I'm an old person who has paid his dues bit,you see I'm an old person and I use the "I'm an old person" bit all the time, and I bet I worked LONGER AND HARDER THAN YOU, blast now you've got me doing it.

dizzy said...

Thinks you'll find that a number of elements in the Hain story were broken on Guido's blog actually.

mike said...

dizzy said...Thinks you'll find that elements in the Hain story were broken on Guido's blog actually.

Me thinks you live in a little world called Blog, need to read other stuff before you credit that lightweight with anything, apart from malicious tittle-tattle that is. Disappointed you allowed "Little Black Sambo" to post, this moronic little creep shows you be a person of poor judgement. Thus whatever you say now needs to be read bearing that in mind.

dizzy said...

Actually I live in a little world called the news, and am aware of which stories in the Hain donor stuff were first published on Guido's blog before they were published or broadcast elsewhere.

As for posting a comment by someone that is a moronic little creep, I'm not sure what that makes you. A hagged old wanker perhaps?

mike said...

dizzy said...A hagged old wanker perhaps?
Nope, someone who thinks posting as Little Black Sambo is offensive, that's all.

dizzy said...

Well I'm afraid you do not have the right to not be offended, and I;m not going to stop someone posting a comment just because they have chosen a handle that some people might find offensive. Personally I actually find the name mike offensive but I still let you post. I'm curious though, how do you feel about hip hop?

comfy socks and co-op rum said...

If you are unable to comprehend the difference between posting as Mike or posting as Little Black Sambo then you are lost. You need to meet my elderly relatives, I'm talking about folk in their eighties and beyond. They would not be offended by the use of Little Black Sambo, in fact they use that and similar in daily conversation. We appear to have a generation thing going on here you know, you and them and your bigoted little friend would get on like a house on fire. For a short time anyway, and then you would realise that it wasn't OK to offend for the sake of it. But the very old don't understand that, in fact calling someone Little Black Sambo is a sign of affection, bless their little cotton socks. Still they'll soon be dead and all will be well again.

dizzy said...

*rolleyes* of course I'm a bigot, why didn't anyone tell me! The commenter is not my "little friend", he, or she, is a just some random person on the Internet hiding behind a name. The point is that no one has the right not to offended. People that are racist are idiots, it is not racist to let them speak and call them as such, as I have let Mike do. I just think Mike's a twat, much like I think you are too. But I don't stop you offending people now do I. Of course, I bet in your little world you're one of those people that ignores ethnic on ethnic racism and palms it off with cultural relativism or simply deny that it exists. Thankfully, intelligent people like Darcus Howe have pointed out it does and then been accused of being 'coconuts' to boot. Frankly comfy socks, you can go fuck yourself and your bullshit accusations.

Little Black Sambo said...

Some one who finds "Little Black Sambo" an offensive name needs a course in English literature.

JuliaM said...

"Still they'll soon be dead and all will be well again."

I'm offended by that...

"...you can go fuck yourself and your bullshit accusations..."

But that's how we deal with what offends us. Not by censoring comments or deciding something is off limits.

Get it now...? :)

mike said...

JuliaM said...Not by censoring comments or deciding something is off limits.
Censoring, censoring blossom ? I merely pointed out to our host he had shown poor judgement. He responded by calling me a "A hagged old wanker". The man has a way with words I'll give him that.

JuliaM said...

"The man has a way with words I'll give him that."

Don't know about his way with words, but he certainly appears to be a very good judge of character...

Anonymous said...

Mike. Offence is /taken/. Not given.

Zorro.

Anonymous said...

Mike / Co-op Rum etc

Behave yourself or I'll get Verity to eat you alive, like she used to do on Iain Dale's blog...