The combined might of Twitter and a MP (surely it can’t be the first time the words “Twitter” and “MP”, or parts thereof, have been used in the same sentence), have done what the whole of the UK tabloid press have been unable to do and that is circumvent the law of privacy by naming someone who it is alleged has been the subject of a super injunction. What have we learnt from all of this?
- There is almost certainly a lot further to go;
- Can you credibly have injunctions banning the media from publishing these stories while those in the social media blithely ignore any of the criminal sanctions that might follow?; and
- If you are a celebrity with a super injunction you may be sitting a whole lot less comfortably now.
I am not sure where all of this will end and I suppose it could go in two ways. The judiciary could row back from super injunctions on the basis that it is hard to see how they can remain watertight in future or perhaps more likely a celebrity with very deep pockets could pursue the individuals on the social media sites so aggressively that it acts as a deterrent to future Twitter users.
You can’t help feeling in all of this that if the press complaints commission acted with real vigour and had more teeth as a regulator, most of these stories would not get published and the problem would probably go away!