Editorial – F**k Hugh Grant

Editor M. Literous makes a calm, collected, unbiased and (hopefully) non-libelous look at the imminent press regulation "laws"

I get to decide what goes onto the Tab. I use great responsibility when wielding this great power and I am not some dictator banning everything and anything I disagree with. If it’s not illegal to write then I’ll consider it, if I think someone will want to read it then I’ll publish it. If it’s a comment, then anything not spam or potentially putting me in a court on libel charges will be published; it comes with the territory of loving free speech and participating in a free press.

Mr Wallace kindly explains the key component required for a press to best serve the public interest

This oddly may mean I’m about to break the law.

There are 3 tests to see if a news source must sign up to the new press regulations; it must report on current affairs (we do), it must have multiple contributing authors (we have a fair few) and it must be subject to editorial control (oh shit, that’s me). So for us, yes, yes and yes.

We could well be forced to sign up to a press regulatory body who the coalition has assured us isn’t underpinned by law. It’s just underpinned by a royal charter and there will be new laws to underpin royal charters with law (to be honest, I think this may be a trick. Not even a particularly clever one either).

If you are going to make yourself a figurehead for your ill-sought campain against free press, I’m damn well making you the target of my ill feeling

My biggest concern with all this faff is not even that small outlets like ourselves could be caught in the crossfire, it’s not that it’s putting a vicious boot into a public-serving industry going through its darkest financial days, nor is it even that it made me take the side of Cameron in an argument (although that did hurt). My biggest issue is that we are striking a damning blow to free speech and free press for literally no benefit whatsoever.

If Hugh Grant feels aggrieved at his phone being hacked then I don’t blame him. If he wants laws that prevent this sort of thing happening again, then I heartily agree with the sentiment. However, someone should probably point out these laws already exist. As do laws for lewd conduct in a public place with $1,180 prostitutes.

If you see this Mr Grant, please Google “fair comment” before ringing your lawyers

Sorry Hugh, that was a low blow but I thought I’d take one final moment to enjoy free speech before you play a leading role in taking our free press and roughly taking it from behind. Just like Ms. Divine Brown.

  • Anonymous

    This article made me happy… I love free speech!
    *strokes Mike Literous*

  • Michael Thorpe

    What about in the case of Richard Littlejohn, who drove a woman to suicide over an article he wrote for the Mail?

    • Anonymous

      Well clearly that was a tragedy that nobody could have foreseen, but FREE SPEECH FREE SPEECH FREESPEECHFREESPEECHFREECHFREECH


Who are you voting for? Take our General Election Survey

It’s make your mind up time

, Deputy Editor

An Imperial professor is giving students LSD and watching what happens

It could be a ‘superhighway to the unconscious’

Sponsored by

Square mile start-ups reject macho slave culture to attract best graduates

Want to work in the city and still have a life?

Experts say you shouldn’t ride elephants in Thailand

A tourist was killed, and the animals are often unhappy

, Contributing Editor

More people should tell Chris Martin that he’s awful

It’s the right thing to do

, Chief Reporter

Sushi could be the key to getting a second date on Valentine’s Day

Is raw fish really an aphrodisiac?

Just have a normal pancake

I don’t want your protein, or your goji berries, or your almond milk

, Chief Reporter

Match4Lara: They’ve found a stem cell donor

The Masters student’s family described it as ‘pure relief’