But surely you can't be held responsible for a hidden accusation about this guy that was hidden in another topic? seems a bit much.
it is hardly hidden though is it not exactly rocket science to work out what people were intimating at which seems pointless s everyone knows his name anyway. BBC radio 4 mentioned his first name today by error
From what little I know othe media has no interest in anything noble here. In the case of the footballer the sun has challenged every legal case on the grounds that it is in the public domain [ NOT PUBLIC INTEREST]. Given their news organisation is currently going to court for breaching people's privacy via illegal phone tapping it is is not inconceivable that they have actually been leaking the information themselves.
They have never once claimed that it is in the public interest to publish this which speaks volumes about their motives and our right to know.
Whatever we think about our right to know [ to be honest why does anyone care who sleeps with who] would anyone here, with kids and family, actually want that stuff printed in the national papers. it is not about our freedom to know v state censorship of the media IMHO.
So in the week that news international are in court for illegal phone tapping, have been charged with contempt of court {treatment of the landlord in the bristol murder] we are meant to think this fine and noble organisation is all about protecting freedom and upholding a fine tradition of investigative journalism
My arse
I suspect a list is sent to media outlets especially papers i doubt they send it to STW but it would be hard for STW to deny they know of the ban now
