I can’t comment on what someone who can’t be said to be a banker was up to when the Crunch hit. The buzz when Twitter user @injunctionsuper spilled the beans was mainly around the celebrities named.
@Ruskin147 – Rather weird that Twitter has been alive with super-injunction details for weeks – but one new account with inaccurate reports is news
@DorothyKing – If we’re not “allowed” to know who has a #superinjunction how do we know who not to discuss? Goldsmith? Ryan Giggs? Fred Goodwin? Branson?
@TheSpacePope – Anyone think @injunctionsuper got one wrong deliberately to allow trad media to be able to report the story? #superinjunction
However less was said about the conduct of those at the helm of an industry whose collapse cost the UK taxpayer £1trillion – perhaps because they have deeper pockets. But even if you get a “Contra Mundi” super-injunction it can’t redact the internet rumours altogether.
- The story may have been pulled from http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2011/03/12/internet-destroys-fred-goodwins-affair-super-injunction …but it still shows up in Google search results and the full blog is still in the cache at http://bit.ly/iFPlYR
- The Daily Mail may have pulled the story published in print before the injunction from its website – but it seems to have overlooked the mobile version web page
- And Guido Fawkes still publishes a rumour without naming names or professions: http://order-order.com/2011/03/11/unbankable-story/
But I can’t say anything.
Except to point out that sometimes even recent history repeats itself:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1573557/Northern-Rock-chief-had-affair-before-collapse.html