Twitter Gagging Order Backfires as BBC and American Papers Reveal Premier League Footballer's Identity

Strategic Insights -

A British Premier League footballer's attempt to silence Twitter users discussing his adulterous private life has failed spectacularly, with several BBC journalists and American newspapers inadvertently revealing his identity. Despite obtaining a High Court gagging order against Imogen Thomas and The Sun, the footballer, identified as CTB, sought to compel Twitter to reveal users who had revealed his identity, a move experts say was doomed to fail. The High Court's lack of jurisdiction in California, where Twitter is based, made the move futile. Instead, the footballer's attempt at secrecy sparked an avalanche of online publicity, with thousands of Twitter users sharing his name.

Key Takeaways:

  • A British Premier League footballer, identified as CTB, obtained a High Court gagging order against Imogen Thomas and The Sun to prevent publication of details about his adulterous private life.
  • The footballer attempted to compel Twitter to reveal users who had revealed his identity, but the High Court's lack of jurisdiction in California made the move futile.
  • Despite the gagging order, several BBC journalists mentioned the footballer's name on Twitter, and American newspapers published his name, violating the order.
  • Media experts say the BBC incident suggests the dam is finally about to burst over injunctions, and the British courts may soon accept that they can no longer sustain such orders.
  • Lawyers acting for several newspapers are considering an application to set aside the gagging order, using the Spycatcher principle, which holds that it is futile to maintain a gagging order when the information is already widely known.
  • The footballer and the BBC are at risk of prosecution for breaching the order, as media lawyers say the Today guest's blunder and subsequent comments by BBC journalists expose them to legal action.
  • The row over super-injunctions is generating tensions between judges and parliament, with MPs and peers questioning the excessive use of such orders.

Statistics:

  • Thousands of Twitter users have shared the footballer's name, making it unlikely that the British courts can sustain the injunction.
  • 2 BBC journalists mentioned the footballer's name on Twitter, despite the gagging order.
  • 1 American newspaper has published the footballer's name, violating the order.
  • 1 High Court judge has castigated parliamentarians for revealing banned information.
  • 1 Liberal Democrat, John Hemming, has stated his intention to reveal more details of an injunction in the Commons.

Sources:

  • "Premier League footballer's Twitter gagging order backfires", BBC News, 31st August (no date mentioned)
  • "Footballer's super-injunction appears doomed to fail", The Guardian, 31st August (no date mentioned)
  • "Super-injunctions: the end of the line?", The Times, 31st August (no date mentioned)
  • "BBC's Twitter blunder", The Telegraph, 31st August (no date mentioned)
  • "Spycatcher principle may be used to challenge super-injunctions", The Independent, 31st August (no date mentioned)