David Beckham's leaked emails

[parrots]

I thought he came across rather well on Desert Island disks the other day, but AIBU to be glad that DB has been exposed?

I've always regarded the Beckhams as a textbook example of much that's wrong with our celeb-culture, accumulating vast wealth and renown on the coat-tails of very mediocre talent.

Now it seems the charitable work was all in aid of securing a knighthood.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4190152/Hackers-release-tranche-Beckham-s-personal-emails.html

cara you seem overly invested in sticking the knife into him. Are you Rebecca loose love out for revenge?

I imagine it is stuff he has said about other people - not just 'celebs' - government, royal family, charities, general public, it is about his attitudes and his finances and affairs.

Rugby
I think the whole brand Beckham will
Implode without Cara's involvement

Lulu yes I think you're on the money there, negative opinions him and VB share about others would be highly embarrassing for them if they came out.

Media and celebs are usually in a weird symbiotic relationship in which neither side occupies the moral high ground. Different media outlets will be quite happy to promote celebs despite being aware of how awful they are privately, while exposing other celebs for similar or more trivial misdeeds. Celebs have feet of clay (don't we all?) and make their own dodgy deals with media for promotion/protection/whatever. If media outlets are hanging on to dynamite information about someone famous without gathering evidence and then publishing it, we have to ask why.

We should maintain a healthy scepticism about both sides.

If it's financial, rather than personal, stuff why would an injunction be granted? Aren't these things usually granted for privacy reasons? Of course I know nothing!

Totally agree Sense.
If you make a pact with the devil, one shouldn't be surprised when they turn against you.

It could be both together. Financial emails which also refer to person life matters.

Financial information is protected by privacy law in its own right,

I think Sense has hit the nail on the head - the media is very good at deciding that a particular celebrity is "good" or "bad" and publishing stories that paint them in that particular light. The Mail will never print a nice word about Hugh Grant or Steve Coogan again because of their role in Hacked Off.

Perhaps it's a lesson to all of us to be a bit more sceptical about what we read.

isit

For goodness sake leave the poor bloke alone. Who here would like their emails and privacy splashed everywhere?

Yes he's a celeb but he became a celeb through dedication hard work and skill. Give him a break.

I agree hack to me all the newspapers are comics really and print bias news. I get my facts from the BBC and Radio 5 live.

You might as well read heat magazine and take a break as read the Fail, Guardian, Times etc.

Ah yes. Steve Coogan and Hugh Grant. Who want the press to be silenced about the fact that the treat women like shit so the likes of Mumsnetters will still swoon over them and go and see their movies.

And saying that you go to the BBC for unbiased news is like saying you go to Tesco for locally sourced products.

"Rugbyplayersarehot

cara you seem overly invested in sticking the knife into him. Are you Rebecca loose love out for revenge?"

Has mumsnet patented the expression "overly invested"? If not, they should. Every other poster with nothing to say uses it.

"Rebecca loose"? Huh?

Why would anyone swoon over Steve Coogan?

rugbyplayers it wasn't just down to 'hard work, dedication and skill'. It was also down to marketing an image, a brand.
As was said previously, plenty of celebrities are famous just for their work and they are not usually targeted by the press. The Beckhams are, because they weren't content with the results of their work - ie David's football career and Victorias career in the Spice girls. No one forced them to sell their wedding to Hello, that was a step they took because they wanted more.
If you want to get rich through selling an image then you'd better be sure that image is watertight or risk being exposed.

Dunno, Cara, but apparently some do. It's a strange world.

This sleb label is so annoying, too. He is an ex-footballer not someone whom one should celebrate.

It is quite telling, in relation to the brand idea, that most other well known parents protect the identities of their children.

Why do they expose them, as they do? It is unseemly.

plenty of celebrities are famous just for their work and they are not usually targeted by the press

I don't agree, actually. The whole phone hacking scandals shows that isn't the case. People who were newsworthy (as popular or unpopular) were targeted, whether or not they were branding and marketing themselves, often over things they wanted to KEEP private (not necessarily because those things were embarrassing or negative).

"Becks was said to be defiant last night, insisting the emails were sent 'in the heat of the moment' and he did not care about being knighted, according to the Sunday Mirror."

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned the Sunday Times was involved and expected to go for a splash today.

Interesting news about the Sunday Times this morning. Ahem.

I'm just so bemused that he wants a knighthood so much, and also thinks that he deserves one. He was a good footballer, but probably only the third best out of his "Class of '92" cohort (Giggs and Scholes were much better players IMO). I don't think he's "due" a knighthood on the strength of his sporting achievements. He also isn't currently "due" on the basis of his charity work, which is quite clearly organised to enhance the Beckham Brand. It's a bizarre level of delusion.