The Inforrm blog yesterday reached one million hits – 2 years and 3 months after our launch. Once again, we would like to thank all our readers and the many people who have contributed to the success of the blog over this period and particularly those who have written for us over the past two years. We reached 500,000 hits in June 2011 – after 17 months – and we have had a further 500,000 since. This is Inforrm blog post number 1,170.
Our friends at the UK Human Rights Blog recently celebrated their own one million hits with a seminar. While the idea crossed our minds – very briefly – we decided instead to celebrate our own one million hits with a party for our contributors and subscribers. Details will be emailed to subscribers shortly (hint: to get an invitation, you need to subscribe).
Our Top Twenty Posts of all time have been as follows (in descending order of popularity):
Harassment and injunctions: Cheryl Cole – Natalie Peck
“The cases of Vanessa Perroncel and John Terry – a curious legal affair” – Dominic Crossley
Case Law: ETK v News Group Newspapers “Privacy Injunctions and Children” – Edward Craven
News: Tulisa “Sex Tape”, false privacy turns into true privacy
Inforrm 2011 Media Law Quiz of the Year
The MP and the “Super-Injunction” – rumour, myth and distortion (again)
News: Hemming MP’s “super injunction victim” named as sex abuse fabricator
Inforrm Media Law Quiz of the Year – 2010
Wayne Rooney’s Private Life and the Public Interest [Updated]
Anonymity, “Take That” and Reporting Privacy Injunctions
US Freedom of Expression and Media Law Roundup 7 July 2010
Privacy law: the super-injunction is dead
Strasbourg on Privacy and Reputation Part 3: “A balance between reputation and expression?”
Responsible journalism and William Hague
Defamation in Scotland – mostly quiet on the northern front?
Case Law: Thornton v Telegraph Media Group, an offer of amends defence fails – Hugh Tomlinson QC
A load of hype? The phone hacking scandal may be bigger than we thought – Brian Cathcart
Media Responsibility and Chris Jeffries
Case Law: Flood v Times Newspapers, Reynolds defence fails
Finally, to repeat a point we have made many times since our launch – one of the main purposes of the Inforrm blog is to provide a forum for serious debate on media and legal issues and we repeat our invitation to anyone who is interested in a guest post (or repost) on any of the topics which we cover. Subject to the usual rules of lawfulness, decency and the avoidance of gratuitous personal attacks we accept contributions on media and legal topics from all points of view. Please let us have any suggestions by email at inforrmeditorial@gmail.com.
One thing just crossed my mind after reading this post. To whom does “we” refer?