This morning's newspapers have reported that a Twitter user has set up an account allegedly exposing celebrities who have obtained injunctions against the reporting of aspects of their personal life.
In recent months a number of celebrities are reported to have sought super injunctions restricting what publications can print in a bid to protect their privacy.
However, social media sites have been awash with speculation over the details of the stories and the identities of the celebrities involved.
Kindred director, Lorna Gozzard said: ‘The key issue here is, whether in an age where information (and gossip) is so incredibly shareable, a super injunction can ever be fully effective. From a PR perspective, it creates two stories – the original misdemeanour and then the cover up – making it even harder to manage.’
PHA Media Chairman, Phil Hall, who represents a number of celebrity clients, said that media injunctions were a valid tool in reputation management in some cases.
‘The whole campaign is about newspapers winning the right to publish sensational stories that sell their products and who can blame them for wanting to do that. But, Just because it is not possible to police Twitter, it doesn’t mean that the media at large should be able to publish any story they wish, however private.’
Hall added: ‘The clear solution to the newspaper issue would be to broaden the powers of the Press Complaints Commission and allow to judge what is truly in the public interest and thus what remains private and what does not.’
This morning it emerged that the Press Complaints Commission will undertake a consultation that lead to the body regulating journalists' and newspapers' Twitter feeds.