Keith Harrison: Freedom of the press isn't girls in states of undress

| Published:

BED-BREAKING NEWS: Hugh Grant has fathered a baby boy. 'Lovechild No3' as The Sun puts it, making the new arrival sound like some 1970's disco instrumental.

The film actor Hugh Grant. Not a girl in a state of undress - just to clarify.

Crack out the exclamation marks! 'He's at it again!' and a 'Swedish TV boss has been revealed as mum'.

The 'TV boss' was Anna Elisabet Eberstein and there's a sensational twist; the baby 'was born three months before Grant's second tot with lover Tinglan Hong, 33'.

Waaaaitaminute. So unmarried multi-millionaire celebrity Hugh was 'at it again!' with two women at roughly the same time?

Expect his membership of the Unmarried Multi-Millionaire Celebrity Club to be torn up any day now.

"He'll be blackballed for sure - if he isn't already after all this bedroom activity," said Finbarr Saunders, Head of Double Entendres.

When did this earth-shattering, front page news happen? I missed it on Twitter, Buzzfeed and Channel 5 News. Last 10 minutes? Last night? Last week? Last year?

Er, no - 2012. Which in celebrity goss spheres is History Channel territory.


Keeping up that old news theme, the headline inside said 'No Weddings and a Few Kids', still referencing a film that came out 20 years ago.

At this point, an important question needs to be asked . . .

Who cares? Really? It's 2014.

Shouldn't we be 'over' celebrity bed-hopping?


Are we supposed to be surprised? Shocked even?

This isn't the Profumo era; we've had decades of pop stars, film stars, Z-list stars and politicians all at it.

Paddy Pantsdown was a long time ago. We laughed on the day. Now it's a tired old joke no-one wants to hear.

They've been knocked up, dressed up, tied up and often stitched up. They've worn dog collars, swastikas and Chelsea strips – sometimes at the same time.

And it's been anyone and everyone, from Big Brother honeypots to the Right Dishonourable John Major and (I still shudder at this) Edwina Currie.

So are readers of The Sun docile masses turning out of British Leyland factories and sitting slack-jawed at the thought of Hugh Grant having it away?

Does The Sun think they are?

And who cares about Hugh Grant's love-life anyway? His name is on the baby's birth certificate, so I doubt Ms Hong needed a newspaper to keep her informed.

He hasn't had a hit film for years and is most commonly seen moaning about celebrity life and – guess what – press intrusion.

How strange that he should get such a public kicking.

But even at its most guttural, The Sun has the cheek to seek out the moral high ground with this gem: 'We are not revealing the child's name.' Oh, the ethics.

Now, a late point of order here; I know it's not the done thing for someone in my position to criticise other members of this noble profession.

And, hell, we've all had quiet news days – even in the Black Country's daily maelstrom. But I think The Sun is big enough to take it. It's certainly ugly enough.

And I'm only trying to help.

Time has moved on and the Gotcha generation has all grown up.

If The Sun can't bear to look in the Mirror, it could at least send itself a selfie.

Because anyone who thinks it's OK to put pictures of topless Lissy, 20, from Manchester on Page 3 in 2014 clearly needs a radical rethink.

Now, ain't that The Truth?

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.


Top stories


More from Shropshire Star

UK & International News