So, the growing disquiet surrounding injunctions and super injunctions is a tricky issue, to say the least. There to prevent publication of details about the private lives of well-known people, it is easy to see the motivations for those wishing to take out these so- called “gagging orders”. A desire to keep their private lives private is understandable; however, the issue comes when considering whether the freedom of speech act is being jeopardised.
As a result of the difficulty in this balancing act, the matter seems to be spiraling out of control. Some are determined to get round the media gagging and are now using websites such as Twitter to expose alleged celebrity indiscretions. Just last night a well-known blogger used a Twitter account to list 14 personalities and to make obscure references to them. This follows on from the tweets this week of a list of celebrities who have recently obtained injunctions, coming without any apparent sanction.
More than two million people are thought to have been forwarded last week’s list exposing certain celebrities. However, it appears that these exposés are not entirely accurate. Jemima Khan and Gabby Logan have both adamantly denied the allegations against them regarding alleged infidelities with other well-known people, exposing the danger that comes in such revelations. It’s all very well citing freedom of speech and a right to know but when individuals are targeted without real evidence, there is the potential to seriously damage the reputations and lives of those targeted.
Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said yesterday that Twitter was "making a mockery" of privacy laws and has pledged to examine how best to bring regulations up to date. Prime Minister David Cameron has also sounded a warning about the way judges rather than Parliament are creating a new law of privacy by granting such injunctions.
Whatever your view on the matter, the situation surrounding injunctions and super injunctions is clearly extremely messy and needs to be resolved. Quickly!