An end to kiss-and-tell?

Rejoice oh ye faithful, for Lord Justice Eady’s ruling on privacy law has been upheld.

Let me briefly explain: Canadian folk singer Loreena McKennitt sought an injunction against a book by her ‘friend’ Neima Ash, revealing private details about her emotional state, her sexual relationships and her home, amongst other things.

Lord Justice Eady, the David Beckham of media law, ruled for McKennitt, a decision which has now been upheld by the court of appeal. This effectively spells the end for the unauthorised ‘kiss-and-tll’ story, cutting off the supply lines of many a gossip column or hastily penned salacious biography.

So why would a journalist applaud the tightening of privacy law? Doesn’t this snatch the bread from our mouths and strip the pen of its power?

If anything, the reverse is true. For years, journalists have suffered from a reputation somewhere between that of Nicolai Ceaucescu and the Ebola virus. We are never trusted, rarely believed and seldom praised.

This is partly because of the festering cess-pool of celebrity-chasing and waistline-watching that goes on at one end of the industry (i.e. the one that sells).

What the McKennitt v. Ash ruling may have achieved is an end to the least attractive, least valuable part of our trade. Not only will the efforts of talented journalists be channelled into more worthy causes, but ‘real news’ will at last have an opportunity to step out from the shadow of it’s wealthier, more successful cousin, ‘celebrity news.’

Of course, this doesn’t mean the death of gossip columns or of tabloid rumour-mongering, and nor should it. Such journalism responds to an obvious demand and I cannot argue with that type of logic. Many celebrities will continue to benefit from the Faustian pact which allows them free advertising in return for having their privacy ‘invaded’. This ruling does not seek to end that tradition.

But it does offer protection to those who do not court publicity, or at least appreciate some discretion in how they choose to do so. In short, everybody wins – people in the public eye have their private lives protected, the quality of the press can only improve, and the public…well, that’s a tricky one.

Should the public get what the public wants, to quote The Jam? That’s a different debate for a different time. In the meantime, I raise my glass to Lord Justice Eady and the future of journalism.