Sean O'Shea


Home Page > Blogs > Sport blogs > Sean O'Shea > Ryan Giggs would have got the Brett Favre treatment in American media thanks to First Amendment
Sean O'Shea by Sean O'Shea

Ryan Giggs would have got the Brett Favre treatment in American media thanks to First Amendment

Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2011 at 11:24 AM
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail
comment on article 1 Comment
 

RSS


Recent Posts

Archives

submit to reddit



Ryan Giggs may be the talk of the town in Britain after a judge blocked all coverage of his connection to a sex affair with a model but it is impossible to see a similar event happening here.

No judge in his right mind in America would seek to prevent coverage of a sports star and an alleged affair.

This is not national security we are talking about, nobody was threatened with death, this is about the oldest story in history, boy meets girl and strays from wife.

Take Brett Favre for instance. I'm sure there is nothing more he would have liked than to stop publication of his ridiculous e mails to a New York Jets employee featuring pictures of his private parts.

He did not have a hope in hell and the story exploded into the national media soon after it became known.

The First Amendment protects our freedom of speech in a way that the British and indeed the Irish can only dream about with their outmoded libel laws and stuffy judges wearing horsehair wigs.

Giggs would have been on page one a few days after the allegation was made and likely most of it would have been forgotten by now.

But the British insist on these outdated legalisms that take no account of the Internet or modern day reality.

It is time they grew up and stopped the silliness.


print this article Print
email this articleE-mail

1 comments

Page 1 of 1 pages
freebriton | May 22, 2011, 10:27 AM EDT
"But the British insist on these outdated legalisms" "It is time they grew up and stopped the silliness." The author seems to imply that court ordered superinjuctions are a relic of old British laws when in fact they are an interpretation of the European human rights act which is a modern piece of legislation that comes from European and not British law makers. Also the author confuses the opinions of UK citizens and UK politicians with those of a handful of judges and their buddies in the legal profession. I can not find a single Brit who agrees with these silly injunctions and British politicians have actively undermined such injunctions using 'Parliamentary privilege' to expose details that would otherwise still be undisclosable by the British media. I hope the author can understand why I find his closing remarks rather offensive but apart from that thanks for disclosing the name of the footballer in this case! Keep up the good work. PS. I suggest you stay out of the UK until these silly court orders are thrown out by our legislators.

Report abuse

Page 1 of 1 pages




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account

or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail