June 16, 2009 Leave a comment
The blogosphere has today been awash with entries on Mr Justice Eady’s refusal “to grant an order to protect the anonymity of a police officer who is the author of the NightJack blog.”
NightJack had sought an injunction to stop The Times from revealing his name.
The pick of the blogs are as follows;
Iain Dale, after writing about the BBC’s reports about NightJack, was directed to the Times article (which he didn’t give a link to, and neither will I). He informed us that he had just read the “vomit inducing article”.
Hopi Sen ponders on the risk of an outed anonymous blogger.
Old Holborn has dirt on Patrick Foster, the outer.
Sunder Katwala has done a far better version of what I’m doing here.
In my opinion, this will keep happening in the light of the expenses scandals, that is to say the media’s attempt at undoing the anonymity of those things people keep anonymous.
Dishing the dirt is the current media Zeitgeist, or rather the spirit of the Times.
A debate sparked earlier on Iain Dale’s blog asking about whether this was in the public’s interest, and my two cents was, of course, no.
Unlike many on Dale’s blog, I don’t think this has anything to with so-called “ZaNu-Labour”, but rather it is a rat-race in the print communications to reveal the most shocking revelations.
For The Times, though, this will not be such a revelation!
But it does make one wonder; what will be next?
Is the Queen a member of the English Democrats in secret (and in spite of the legalities of her joining a political party); is Elvis the eighth pillar of wisdom; did Maggie steal Mr. Whippy ice-cream from someone called Dave Whippy; are the BNP in the employ of Trevor Phillips?
Perhaps the age of revelations will be exciting and fun, but not yet (and at present, with NightJack, just seems utterly cruel).