Friday, 18 July 2008

sex, lies and videotape

In a Trial About Privacy in Which None Remains
as the New York Times calls it, Max Mosley, head of Formula One's governing body FIA, is suing the News of the World newspaper for invasion of privacy after publishing a story about an S&M assignation with five women which, they alleged, had a nazi theme. (One of them wore a German airforce jacket and some - faux - German was spoken, it must be true!)

Mosley asserted that, as a son of World War II nazi sympathisers, it would be just about the least sexy thing he could think of. Women A, B, C and D testified for Mosley, saying there was no such undertone to the scenes, whilst woman E, the one that sold the story to the newspaper and taped the session for them, declined to testify.

The real issue, to me, is whether the newspaper had a right to publish it - nazi theme or not. They argue it's in the public interest, but I remember a great quote in one of the article on the story in the Times of London, saying that what interests the public does not equal the public interest.

The Times seems to enjoy reporting on this, not shying away from the titillating details (blameless sex stories, I bet they're grateful to the News of the World):
Max Mosley, the motor racing chief, begged a dominatrix who had spanked him at an alleged Nazi orgy for more brutal punishment at their next encounter, the High Court was told.

At the next party, filmed secretly by the newspaper, he was bound, shackled, given 15 lashes from a flayed whip, then tasted six of the best from a woman wielding a toshido martial arts cane.

“It’s hardly surprising that she drew blood, which needed to be dealt with by the application of a surgical dressing,” Mr Warby said.

The prostitutes, in their evidence, had sought to present it as “some kind of worthy activity attended by the most strict health and safety precautions as if it was being carried out by the Bondage and Sadomasochism Regulatory Authority,” he mocked.

(Mark Warby is the QC, for the News of the World)


I'm labelling this post b(ack)log, but the judge's ruling will be next week, so technically it's still current...

Aside: a little coincidence. The Times (of New York) has been running ads for a movie called Choke, including along the Mosley article. Remember breath play is dangerous because it's unpredictable, boys and girls.



choke

EDIT: From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

1 comment:

headbang8 said...

Poor taste, yes. Glamourising evil, yes. Any of our business? No.