| |
|
Hmm... yeah, but that's the point, isn't it? That's why we have the concept of Free Speech - because my definition of what is odious and biased reporting and that of your average Sun-reader differ, and they might feel that campaigning against the war was 'not in the national interest'.
So we say 'you can express whatever view you like'.
But this is just a rather icky piece of gossip - isn't it? - so if the Free Speech vs. Privacy row starts again, where do I stand? I have to say I think this kind of drivel damages the Free Speech case - not the argument, but the credibility.
Ideally, this kind of thing would come under the heading of 'responsible journalism' and wouldn't get printed. But it sells papers, so...
(I love how they've put a little hotline in for the girl to call...) |
|
|
