I learned a new term last week. "Super Injunction." This is not anything I've ever heard of in America and I have to say that its meaning is as silly and juvenille as the name sounds. "Super" in front of anything to me takes away from the seriousness of a word. But apparently in the U.K. it's a serious thing. So serious it's hilarious.
"An injunction obtained in a secret convening of the court where in the result, the court file, the names of the parties and even the terms of the injunction order are secret except as between the parties, counsel, the judge and the court staff. "
A secret convening of the court. That is so cloak and dagger sounding! The media can't even report that an Injunction exists, much less report the details. It reminds of something 8 year olds concoct when they're engaged in role playing games. "And then I stoled your rubies but you couldn't do anything about it because I called SUPER INJUNCTION. And then you tried to steal them back but you couldn't get across my moat. And there's super big alligators in there. And we both fell in and had to help each other escape. Let's go!"
Besides being stupid sounding, it IS stupid. You got all these famous athletes and celebrities running around misbehaving and then pulling the Super Injunction card to hide what they did in order to protect their reputations and such. I call bullshit on that.
On what planet does a person think he DESERVES to keep his clean image intact when he's doing not so clean things? Reality check fools - Respect and admiration is earned. People love you the most because of what they THINK they know about you. Companies give you endorsements because they THINK you represent their product well. But if you eff up and don't meet the criteria anymore, then you don't deserve to keep the job. You're lying and misrepresenting yourself. If you want the adoration of millions of screaming fans, you have to walk the walk, not dupe everybody. What kind of person are you? I have news for you - trying to hide your dirty deed and lie to the world makes you a much bigger jackass than if you had just owned your mistake, apologized, and taken your lumps like a man. Ask any American athlete or celebrity. People forgive and forget mistakes. But we don't take too kindly to being treated like chumps.
And here's another thought - if you're so concerned about protecting your family - where was that concern when you were betraying them?
You know, although it's repulsive, I do understand where a person's first instinct would be to hide from the big bad decision that was made. But what is the excuse of the law makers who think this is a good rule to have? It makes no sense to me. I was considering moving to the U.K. if the 2012 election goes bad but I think I'm realizing, y'all are as crazy as us :)
This is about where the story ended last week when I originally wrote this post then accidentally deleted it. I've been pouting for a few days over it but some recent news got me fired up again.
That fool Ryan Giggs who got this whole Super Injunction business riled up was actually suing Twitter because of all the tweets that broke the silence of the gag order regarding his affair with Imogen Thomas - whoever in the world that is. Is this guy "special?" I doubt TWITTER was ever served with an injuction, and did he really think there would be a way to slap the wrists of all the Twitter users who dropped his name or some variation of it? Talk about a simpleton!
I notice that his name is everywhere today, as opposed to last week when I couldn't find a peep about the situation anywhere. Then I was pleased to also learn that just today on DAYBREAK, British Prime Minister David Cameron declared these types of Super Injunctions to be unfair and unreasonable and that current laws need to be reviewed to fit the current media environment. I also think he called them "stupid" under his breath but don't quote me on that ;)