Party Lines

Are superinjunctions absolutely super? Our columnist overhears the great debate...

It’s just a bunch of lawyers, isn’t it, lining their pockets. 

Do you think so, darling?

Mummy! It doesn’t matter, does it? With gossip. Nobody really believes it anyway. Maybe it’s lies, maybe it isn’t…

Well, sweetie, there’s a difference.

As long as it’s interesting-

Mm. But to be serious for a moment-

I was being serious!

Seriously-it’s all good fun for us, reading our magazines and all that!-but even celebrities should be entitled to a private life. 

Well-they can have whatever “private life” they want. Behind closed doors…

But it’s not private if we all get to read about it next day…

Yes it is!

Well-sweetie-no, it’s not.

They did it in private. Didn’t they?

Yes-but it’s not “private” if someone thoughtless goes and puts it on Twitter… 

I’m not getting you, Mummy. Jemima Khan and Jeremy Clarkson…Whatever they did or didn’t do, they did it “privately”. Quote unquote. Because, if you think about it, apart from Paris Hilton, everyone does it privately.

I don’t think you quite understand the idea behind superinjunctions-

Of course I understand superinjunctions.    Basically it means, for example, that jug-eared bloke who reads the news or whatever-he  can have it off with whoever he wants, and his wife’s none the wiser! And whereas-before the superinjunction, we didn’t care who he was, let alone who he wasn’t shagging, now everyone knows and we all feel totally sick having to think about it…

Oh gosh-

Would you want to shag him, Mum?

Sweetheart!

No, neither would I.

I didn’t say that!

So therefore, Mummy, the question is: do you think a celebrity-even if it’s one you never even heard of-should automatically be allowed to have sex in secret?

That is NOT the question!

Isn’t it?

Darling, I’m trying to be serious: it’s a question about Freedom of Speech versus Right to Privacy. Whose side are you on? In the big debate? 

Well the girl from Big Brother-obviously. Poor little  thing-DON’T sigh at me, Mummy. Like you have the faintest idea what you’re talking about, either.

IN THIS DAY AND AGE…of the internet and global…everything and all that …What is a “private life”? 

What?

Oh come on! At least try! Do you support Freedom of Speech?

Mum, I haven’t the foggiest what you’re going on  about…but if I were Jug- Ears I would definitely want to abolish superinjunctions because what would be the point of having it off with a guy like him if you couldn’t even show off about it afterwards? Seriously. Start chucking “superinjunctions” around the place  and celebrities like Jug Ears would probably never get laid again.

An autumn note

“For many, the end of this uneasy year cannot come quickly enough”

An ordinary killing

Ian Cobain’s book uses the killing of Millar McAllister to paint a meticulous portrait of the Troubles

Greater—not wiser

John Mullan elucidates the genius of Charles Dickens
Search