Last week's story of interest for me was that which highlighted the failure of London-based oil trader Trafigura in eluding the vigilance of the press, who, with a little help from throngs of Twitter tweeters, managed to unveil the convoluted legal guise known as the 'super-injunction', which has been condemned by many as being a step too far in the constant campaign for protection against the right of the media to report necessary information that is of interest to the public (most of the time).
An article I found by Charlie Brooker, well-known satirist and opinionated columnist on a wide range of topical issues, on the Guardian's website adds further 'philosophical' insight to the argument against super-injunctions. He humourously speculates as to how much 'we don't know' about any other cases of super-injunctions and whether there may actually be more than just a seemingly superior super-injunction (see the coined phrase 'hyper-injunction' in the article). It is a very amusing, and yet pertinent perspective Brooker takes on this highly stimulating debate on legal protection in relation to the press.
The Guardian was itself targetted by this particular instance of a super-injunction, promoted in this case by libel lawyer firm Carter-Ruck, who sought to ban this popular broadsheet paper from having any chance of enquiring into the details of the exposed toxic spill scandal off the Ivory Coast, which potentially brought physical suffering to those native to the area. Such is the worry caused by these mysterious legal barriers, as they could, theoretically, persist and we would have no immediate evidence to prove them or protest against them. In this most recent case, however, the pooled resources of the Guardian's journalists and the online community of Twitter made sure that Trafigura's enigmatic injunction didn't slide its awry shortcomings under the rug to hide from the public.
Here is the link to Brooker's article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/19/charlie-brooker-super-injunctions?showCommentBox=true
The Guardian was itself targetted by this particular instance of a super-injunction, promoted in this case by libel lawyer firm Carter-Ruck, who sought to ban this popular broadsheet paper from having any chance of enquiring into the details of the exposed toxic spill scandal off the Ivory Coast, which potentially brought physical suffering to those native to the area. Such is the worry caused by these mysterious legal barriers, as they could, theoretically, persist and we would have no immediate evidence to prove them or protest against them. In this most recent case, however, the pooled resources of the Guardian's journalists and the online community of Twitter made sure that Trafigura's enigmatic injunction didn't slide its awry shortcomings under the rug to hide from the public.
Here is the link to Brooker's article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/19/charlie-brooker-super-injunctions?showCommentBox=true
No comments:
Post a Comment