A celeb gives us his "take" on super-injunctions
"Hi there. Listen, I dig freedom of the press as much as the next man. Let's face it, without a free press, I wouldn't have the kind of following I have. So, I'm grateful, really, really grateful for a "free press". Thing is, in recent years the press has started taking liberties. So, for clarification's sake, let me simply state the obvious:-
"Freedom of the press means - My publicist is free to provide newspapers, television companies, micro-blogging sites, what-have-you, with any information (including gossip) that might enhance my image, that might further my career, might sell my films - you know, generally make me look like a fucking hip, cool guy. And, similarly, those media outlets are totally and utterly free to swallow anything my publicist feeds them (No point in denying that!)
"Freedom of the press does NOT mean - The press can publish any information or gossip that contradicts the image my publicist has worked fucking hard to develop (and for which, incidentally, I have paid a stack of cash over the years). If I take it upon myself to cruise the streets of LA late at night offering working girls my largesse, offering them my abundance, then what business is it of the press? Or for that matter, what business is it of the members of the public who buy those damn newspapers that my hard-working publicist works day and night to provide with interesting snippets of information about my good self?
"Does that make sense?"
