Yes .. compensation could have become the main motivation for some 'complainants' and there are probably many people who genuinely deserve it but end up having financial difficulties after spending money taking unsuccessful legal avenues.

If celebs use the media to unashamedly promote themselves then in my view they cannot complain when the media bites back with unsavoury stories - they've made a pact with the devil so-to-speak, they can't have it both ways.

Only if the stories are true!

The media is the devil.

Look what they did to Jimmy Saville and he has been no where near a court of law....

Saville is dead so cannot sue.

Cliff Richard would sue so there won't be any accusations just lots of innuendo to convince the gullible unwashed that he is guilty of something.

Looks like their plan is already working.....

More's the pity! He'd be serving a long stretch now and no doubt have a few bruises to show for his fellow cons.

I totally agree. But journalists have to work within the law as Andy Coulson has found out the hard way. Any media story will have an orginator - be it the editor or journalist. But social media posting are nearly always anonymous and unaccountable and spread across the web with astonishing speed.

I read that Cliff Richard knew damn well that there were rumours on the web for months, but was powerless to issue a denial or threaten legal action- as he may have done if a newspaper had printed the story - as it is really difficult to counter an online social media attack.

Dont get me wrong, I would not want to see any celeb hide away after being responsible for any crime, just as they felt - as in Saviles case - they were too big a star to feature in the papers without good evidence. But for God's sake, this trial by social media concept is surely one of the worst things to have evolved from the amazing internet. Its like a 21st century ducking stool, with no survivors - even if they are innocent

Another forum is posting links to the Krays and wierdo parties in Suffolk in around 1967

_________________
Lets be careful out there !

It is thought Cliff is/was the force behind the Super Injunction which has been rumoured these last few Months, keeping his name and the suspicions out of the papers.
Obviously the house search was a 'tangible event' which happened so it was reasonable to report. I suspect the papers will not be as brazen with the stories as Saville as clearly Richard is very much alive and able to sue.

The media (through the statements put out by the Met) did a very efficient job on Menezez when he was shot on the Underground.
Through clever reporting they had everyone believing he had jumped the ticket barriers and ran at great speed to evade pursuing police, making it necessary to put 6 rounds into his skull.

Until of course the real story came out that he was just an ordinary bloke catching the tube on his way to work..........

In my view unfortunately you cannot trust the Police anymore, since they changed from being a Police Force to a Police Service the emphasis has been on managing crime rather than tackling crime, they're more interested in covering their backs no matter what injustice is done, we've seen so many examples of this in recent times e.g. Hilleborough, Stockwell shooting, etc. Oh for the days of Dixon of Dock Green and bobbies who walked the streets and had some connection with their communities!
You cannot blame the media for the sins of others, their job is reporting, and where they can, investigating. They are our only way of discovering what is going on behind the scenes that the establishment wish to be covered up.

The way the Sun reported the Hillsborough disaster? If I recall correctly the papers accusations were supported by South Yorkshire's finest as it fitted very nicely with their narrative.

How is besmirching the names of Liverpool fans any different to besmirching the names of celebs?

To this day the Sun is the most hated paper in Liverpool. Most independent newsagents in the city still refuse to stock it.

How many years and how many inquiries did it take to discover the cover-up by the police went to the very top and the forces chief constable?

If chief constables are capable of mis representing facts to suit an agenda then I have no doubt newspaper editors who will have a lower standard and duty of care will do the same.

Particularly post Leveson and his findings hinting at legislation to bring the media into line, who knows what is being spun, threatened and micro managed behind the scene?