Does Twitter's European master Tony Wang care about his users? He has decided that Twitter will allow those who tweet against a superinjunction over a well publicised marital affair to go it alone.
Now the fact that it is claimed footballer Ryan Giggs has had a 7 month affair with a reality TV starlette is really not my concern. My concern lies with the future of expression and our supposed Human Rights.
Whenever Libya, Egypt, Iran or any other country has recently had political turmoil one of the first things to be removed from these societies was the internet, in particular Twitter, YouTube and Facebook. This toppling of hegemonies was praised throughout the 'developed' West and apparent democracy rules were once there was fascism. Everyone high-fived the internet and went back to their garbling about whatever was trending that day. Our topping the ever expanding ivory tower of freedoms taken for granted as easily as our having a pulse is.
Pressing matters such as "International Draw Mohammed Day" becoming the frontier over which our freedoms and responsibilities struggle to find a moral balance seemed to be back on the cards and the constant battle for artistic goods slapping the economy of quality and accessibility under the Jolly Roger mapped the vast oceans of possibilities for consumers' futures. We were back on track for being humanity again; the red shirts of Thailand had Wikileaks printed in white upon the front of them, Doctor Who's show runner was taking spoilers into account whilst filming, The IMF's president was being politically assassinated and the rapture came and went. Ah, those were the days!
Now it seems something as feeble and as radically irrelevant as whether or not non journalists (well, at least not paid for their efforts) can (re):tweet, tort, ply or spond to something as gutteral* as a man-who-plays-with-a-ball-holding-hands-with-a-girl-who-thinks-she's-pretty-whilst-having-a-different-girl-he-buys-sweets-for-waiting-for-him-at-home can topple this fine internets?
It is time to hold a finger to the courts and tell them that their shenanigans are not warranted or wanted. Rumours, whispers, hogwash and gossip are part of what makes our society what it is - warts and all. And be it a billionaire bank tycoon who marauded both mortgage holders and tax payers running of scot-free or a man cheating on his wife we will not be gagged, bound or beaten. If people are willing to take their money from fame then they must accept that with that success comes scrutiny. Childish, pedantic, contrived and moronic scrutiny which no better serves humanity than a slap on the wrist but a scrutiny which also serves as the basis for our having laws in the first place. Community values are what makes farmers fine and puppy drowners wrong. If we all got to do what we wanted then there would be no need for courts and certainly no internet for which they seem to be so bothersome about.
As we waltz blindly forward we cannot on one hand balance the scales of truth and fairness and yet poke fun of those who don't understand our refined and perverted culture whilst with the other carry a sword fit for beheading those who make it available and defending those who don't have it.
Should a man be able to cheat on his wife? Sadly, yes he should. Should that man be able to stop anyone from talking about it? Gladly no.
*New word, meaning 'of the gutter'
