It begs belief that people are failing to see the real issue here, and instead reply based upon their personal feelings towards Hugh Grant.

I could take him or leave him, but the man makes a good point. The rags of so-called daily "journalism" are a scandalous joke, and an embarrassment to the country.

Buying a red-top is a clear indication of your incredible stupidity (or daily need to see a topless girl at 8.30 in the morning), however the lack of proper journalism doesn't end just with these. They're all just as bad as each-other.

The only believable things in british newspapers, are the date, the footy scores, and perhaps the weather (if it says "rain").

"I don't have many strongly held beliefs, but I do believe in human rights..."

Well I'd have thought that a belief in 'human rights' amounted to a fair old number personally; at least for anybody who gave the slightest fuck about the physical and mental well-being of humanity as a whole...and not just the right of a pampered few to do whatever they like without drawing attention to themselves...

...especially when every aspect of their professional lives -their effective route to 'pamperedness'- involves drawing attention themselves, cravenly seeking our attention, in fact, at every turn.

The other aspect of this whole 'debate' which puzzles me is the idea that only celebrities suffer this 'intrusion'. I happen to know that if it were to come out that I was being "spanked by a girl dressed as a nun", it would soon filter through to all sorts of people who would lap it up, throw it at me at every opportunity and try to embarrass me relentlessly for years...far longer, probably than was the case for most celebs for whom the circus moves on. These things are relative.

In my smallish personal and professional circle, it would be devastating...at least if I gave a fuck.

That said: a) I'd be in constant fear of the creak on the stairs indicating the approach of Mrs Spud, carving knife in hand and reconstructive genital surgery on her mind.

b) Supposing I decided to 'come clean', I'd be denied the chance of a seven figure pay-out from the News of the World for my candid "Spud's Spanking Shame" revelations. I dare say the sub I was put through too might manage a "Spud Who?...fuck off" before slamming down the phone.

c) I went to a Catholic primary school in the late 60s; I have been spanked by several women dressed as nuns...can't recall it was especially arousing, but it was better than getting kept in at playtime.

It amazes when people justify the level of intrusion by the media on the basis of such flimsy reasoning as "they sold a story to the press". It's a symbiotic relationship, one gets publicity the other sells newspapers.

It does not excuse the sort of surveillance of a person's activities that you would expect to read about when the police go undercover to tackle a criminal network.

The phone hacking scandal was the inevitable consequence of media disregard for celebrities having any right to privacy if they put themselves in the public eye.

The price for being what the French call "une cocotte masculine", always on the lookout for publicity and admirers.

the man at 50 is still unable to sort out his relationships with women, and tries to make all the world guilty???

If Hugh hadn't got nicked with a whore in Hollywood some time back perhaps they'd be less interested?

I agree, sounds like a real cracker of a show, downloading it now from thebox.bz

I always thought Hugh fairly Leftish, as he clearly likes ethnic and opprsssed women, and quite possibly even pays them a fair wage ;)

As for the oik Nelson, my goodness, is he saying that story will never get out, because it's true, and he already has a SI on it? Or one of his big-shot Tory buddies is happy to censor any reference upon request? :rollseyes:

Mr. Grant's celebrity status is a valuable property. He wasn't really an important person, beyond the fact that he was important enough of a Star that his interest in a script could help get a film made. The public had little or no legitimate interest in his private life.

We know now, that back in the 1940's and 50's Larence Olivier and Danny Kaye had an on and off Romantic relationship. Had that affair been exposed back in the 1940's both men would have gone to jail and most of Danny Kaye's films and Olivier's later stage work woul;d never have happened. Would that have been better?

If the right to persuse a career in the popular arts is only availible to either the sexlessly "pure" or those so emotionally dead as not to care about the endless prying eyes, what do we lose? Should Fleet Street and it's creepy American offspring be the arbiters of taste for us all?

'... many of the celebrity exposes are purely for profit...'

Bring me the smelling salts. I can't believe the words 'celebrity' and 'profit' can appear in the same sentence.