OK I wasn't going to, but it's a blog not a tablet of stone.
I'm in a quandary. I instinctively dislike censorship, but I also respect peoples' desire for privacy.
I believe in freedom of the press, but find the seedier elements of the press, the tittle tattle tendency, vile and obnoxious.
I believe in parliamentary privilege, but not irresponsible flouting of the law hiding behind parliamentary privilege.
Was Ryan Giggs' superinjunction there to protect his privacy, from allegations of infidelity in a pretty seedy media, or was it an attempt at curtailing the freedom of the press?
If you oppose the superinjunction would you care to write on the internet, about every little indiscretion you've ever committed, everything you've ever done wrong, no matter how excruciatingly embarassing, for all the world to read?
What's the difference between press intrusion and press freedom? Indeed is there one?
I'm just wondering, because I don't think this issue is black and white.