The Press For Reform…???

Your Private Parts: I can remember in the days of good old Spitting Image, the press were often depicted as vultures and jackals and for people in the public eye it is not hard to see why. It must be a complete nightmare to have to wonder whether every time you go out or take your top off on holiday, if somebody is going to be snooping and taking photographs of what should rightfully be your private life, or your private parts.

Every Little Whiff: At various times in the past I have often bought a Daily Express as I particularly like the Crusader crossword, however, I remember back in the nineties, as I opened it up, I used to get so sick and tired of seeing poor Princess Diana paraded and plastered over numerous pages, everyday without fail. Just about everything she did, regardless of whether she wanted it or not. Personally I used to really sympathize and found it wholly distasteful. I know it's a job, but I couldn't understand how the press could be so small-minded and who bloody cares anyway. Leave the lady alone for goodness sake! It must have been horrible not to be able to go anywhere or do anything without such people, behaving a bit like dogs, permanently trying to poke their nose up your backside and sniff every little whiff of what they thought might constitute a story.

A Little Respect! Of course, as everyone knows, that behaviour, and society's sad failure to do anything about it, eventually led to her death. It should have been a lesson learned, however, things have changed little it seems and in recent times we've had a disturbing increase in such intrusions on what should be one's private life, with the hacking of telephone conversations and personal messaging, etc. Even with the recent publication of the Leveson Report calling for change and people such as Hugh Grant campaigning for reform, we still have the people right at the very top, including the P.M. and the Mayor, completely missing the point (yes, I wonder why). It is not about stifling freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, as the P.M. and others purport, it is about showing a little respect for a person's private life and their private parts. Or are such people not entitled to have any private parts?

Sad Failure! Yes, we know that we value our freedom of speech, freedom of information and lack of restrictions in publication and the press in many areas, however, it is way past time that we had some respect for what most of us would consider to be a person's private and personal life, and rightly so! The uninvited intrusion on someone's private life and private parts and the publishing of information relating to such is not about freedom of speech it is about dirty filthy despicable and abhorrent behaviour totally lacking in respect and moral decency. It has nothing to do with public interest and everything to do with filth and scum and something needs to be done to stop the spread of the ill and the upset that comes from it.

It's Simple! To me it is simple… If you wish to make public pictures or information relating to, or that can be classified as, someone's private life, you should not be able to do so within the law unless you have that person's permission. The exception to this should only be if it is information relating to someone committing a crime against society or humanity, and it is therefore wholly in the public interest for that information to be revealed. This should not include personal lifestyle choices and social activities purely between consenting adults such as drug choice and sexual activities.

Being Nosey! This means a man cannot be exposed for trying to pick up another man as long as they are both over the legal age limit. It means you cannot be exposed for spending time and money with a prostitute without your permission. It means you cannot have photographs of your breasts, or any other part of your normally private anatomy published without your permission. You cannot have your social drug activities advertised without your permission. You cannot have your sexual orientations and preferences advertised without your permission and you cannot have private conversations intruded on and information gained there from published without your permission because all of these things actually have nothing to do with anyone else unless they are being particularly nosey. Remember the dogs?

Off Limits! For those that know no better and fail to use their common sense, we have to have boundaries in life. Speed limits, age limits, and off limits. This is to avoid tragedies and people being hurt or abused. Many of the press and supporters of the way things currently are, such as the mayor and the P.M., who don't always know best it seems, and who appear to be anti-legislation in this area, refer to the freedom of the press and what is in the public interest. Well, to me the freedom of the press should not extend to being allowed to abuse people, and in the public interest should mean something that benefits the public.

No Boundaries: A filthy scummy morally lacking society that has no boundaries and no respect for a person's private life and allows the press to run riot and behave in a fashion that results in people's injury, psychological abuse and sometimes even death, is not in the public interest and not in the interest of decency. Fifteen years after such unrestricted freedom of the press caused the death of Princess Diana, and has claimed many more casualties since, it really is about time something was done about it! Apart from having a vested interest, I can't for the life of me see why the Prime Minister and the Mayor should not be able to relate to that! Because for me, as for many, it is that simple!
Crosstalk by Taz: January 2013