Celebrities, injunctions and the Archbishop,of Canterbury- do we care?

I saw the report was on the news but found it so uninteresting I didn't stop reading my book to listen. Couldn't care less whose biological father someone has - its the bringing up but that is important.

I'm not the least bit interested in who is the father of the A of C - what I do find interesting is the very 'forgiving' and non-judgmental attitude to his mother by the press, particularly Charles Moore of the Telegraph (I heard him on Radio 4 yesterday morning)

Contrast that with the press's attitude to women lower down the pecking order - imagine the headlines 'council house girl had sex the night before her wedding to another man and brought up son with the wrong dad'.

He's the image of his biological father and it seems there have been rumours - and his dear old mother is expressing her shock and surprise!

I hear both items yesterday and have to say I was particularly disinterested.

Neither, for me , count as news.... I'm not interested in other peoples personal lives whether that be who their biological father is or any celebrity niff naff and trivia. It just smacks of a slow news day to me.

Yawn !

Yesterday's DT devoted the first 7 pages to Justin Welby's parentage and is front page news again today. I didn't even bother reading it. It is surely a private matter and as he apparently didn't know and is not responsible, as many celebrities are, it should have been kept that way.
Muck raking springs to my mind.

These stories have curiosity factor but are they 'news'?, do they deserve a place in news bulletins or in a newspaper? No. But we have allowed a strange sort of journalism to grow in this country and I have no idea how to stop it. Not buying newspapers doesn't seem to make a difference, they take to the Internet and fill the space with even more rubbish and keep afloat with advertising... I don't give a fig for the 'celebrity' who has gone to court but I am sorry for Justin Welby and his family although he seems to be coping with his usual good nature. Did they deserve this sort of attention? No.

I wondered why it was 'news' didn't know if the decision to go public was done willingly or forced upon him. What a non story anyway.

Couldn't care less really. It's something far more widespread than most think. Researchers into Huntingdon's Chorea found this genetically carried illness in families where it shouldn't have been. Their only solution was that some children had been fathered by someone other than the man they believed to be their dad. It's a wise child.......

He was approached by Charles Moore and a newspaper, he then decided to have a DNA test and chose to make the facts known himself , so he did the right thing, stopped bits of nudge,wink, in the press . End of now .

Certainly 'end of' but the question now is why did the Daily Telegraph feel the need to dig about in this bit of dirty washing in the first place? What did they hope to do? Embarrass Justin Welby? For what purpose?

It's interesting gossip, as you say, suzied. That's all. A lot of people like interesting gossip. What harm is there in it? None, as far as I can see. So the Archbishop of Canterbury's dad isn't who he (or his mum) thought he was. Shrug.

Why shouldn't the press and the rest of us 'forgive' his mother? She hasn't sinned against us or the press. The one thing I like about such stories, not that I look for them but I'll read them if they're made public enough on news sites, is that it shows human beings as human beings, which is always rather sweet.

Mollie, it's what newspapers do. All this has done is possibly cause upset to an 80 year old woman

DH said the A of Cs story (in which I am supremely uninterested) was to detract the attention from David Cameron - what an old cynic - but is he right?

Of course there's nothing wrong with being illegitimate. Happens to the best us.

But the whole thing has been very cruel to his mother. The journalist is a male bitch.

Is Mrs Welby senior upset? I thearticle I read I didn't get that impression. She may even be secretly delighted. I hope so.

So, in answer to the OP, no, I don't care but I do like the story. It's like something out of a novel.

No idea if she is upset, I did say possibly upset ,she may be delighted that it is now public that she had a one night stand very shortly before her marriage

Come on Bags! Use it!

Some stories I guess are interesting but I do wonder what century we live in when being illegitimate is news.

I'm an amateur family history addict, sparked by trying to find out who my grandparents were, as I didn't know, so from a FH point of view, the AOC story is interesting. It also shows that just because you discover who your ancestors are on paper doesn't mean they're actually your kith and kin!

The 'threesome' celeb story I don't think is interesting in itself but it's interesting as it being a 'one law for the rich' situation. Their names were published in Scotland today anyway.

A few years ago the BBC were doing DNA tests on a village. Most of the inhabitants were fascinated to find out where their ancestors had come from, but the "Lady of the Manor" was going ballistic because they had found Gypsy DNA in her family. She was going to sue the BBC for suggesting such a thing. I thought it sounded really romantic and decided that one of the squires must have been unable to sire an heir so his lady had bedded a passing gypsy. So much more interesting than her own marriage!

The celebrity injunction couple should take a leaf out of Justin Welby!s book, he has shown humanity and dignity. If they'd just admitted it and got on with their lives, whether that is threesmes with strangers rubbing olive oil all over each other or whatever, there wouldn't be all this press hooha.

Exactly, suzied. Welby just goes "Wotevs" and moves on. End of story.

The press is always looking for salacious gossip. If you just shrug and don't make it a big deal, it's not salacious so they go and look elsewhere.

Ah but celebrities like hoohaa on the whole. Part of how they make their money.