eavesdropping

we live in a world that is obsessed with celebrity. where we seemingly want to know all there is to know about each of these celebs.
of course it could be argued that there is an unspoken pact between us and the celeb: we will give you fame and adulation but in return we have to a level of access to your life that we would not grant into our own lives.
mostly we are interested in their public activities. oh fearne has her baps out – lets splash them over the paper, oh george michael wants a bit of rough - lets cover the papers in that. in the main the compact between celeb and fawning public works to all concerned benefit.
we had the moral panic over kate moss’ drug abuse (because we never suspected that she might be partying hard), the press crucified her. she loses loads of contracts. morality has won. moss apologises. the media praises her. contracts get re-signed. all is well in the world and all that has changed is that rich people have become richer.
true there are times when the press goes a little too far in search of its story, claiming it is in the national interest. we all know it is in the interest of their bottom line and our own prurient curiosity. our lives are no better for having read the stuff, but we have had a moment or two of pleasure.
for the media there are the twin defences of “it’s in the national interest” and “freedom of speech”.

for the sun and the news of the world (also affectionately known as news of the screws) there seems to be no end to the lengths they will go to get a “national interest” story. who can forget their exposes of how easy it was to get bombs into sensitive positions. (my pal paul told me a great story of one of these escapades – the journalist in question went up to a security guard and said “we got a box in here that had bomb written all over it”. to which security guy said “i will have to teach my sniffer dog to read then…” class.

so it comes as no surprise that the news of the world is involved with tapping into the phones of clarence house. now regardless of your feelings about the royal family (my own journey has been one of royalist, to republican to actually i quite like them being there for the entertainment value….) there comes a point where when the press is just eavesdropping on private conversations of people for the sake of a gossipy exclusive then we have toe say there is something wrong.
it is not just the fact that it is the royal family who have been listened to – but potentially anyone who has called them.
now given how useless the royals are the only reason for doing this is to gather dirt in order to sell papers. though as the princes are in the army it could be argued that the eavesdroppers were trying to get military secrets.

which allows me to make a comment on the current political climate: that of the ongoing war on terror. while the war on terror continues there are growing concerns that some (if not many) of the liberties that we take for granted are being taken away from us.

so it is a wonderful moment of irony when one of the organs that will go on about it’s right to exercise its right to freedom of speech and expression has once again managed to create a situation in which they will lose some of those journalistic liberties they should cherish.

mind you given the stance that the sun and the news of the world take with regard to law and order, maybe, just perhaps they will ask that those journos who are responsible for this are hung for treason. it’s just an idea.