It’s a sorry state of affairs that I am having to write another one of these especially after a relatively quiet period for several years where the press is concerned but here we are.
Articles have appeared in the press over the weekend based on an article in the Mail On Sunday suggesting the BBC are hunting for the mole providing the spoiler. Complete and utter fiction up there with the best works of Bronte, Dickens and Rushdie. The BBC know full well who I am. They know full well that it isn’t just one mole leaking the results but a series of moles in the audience. I’ve had discussions with the BBC on this very topic in 2015 so it’s doubtful they don’t still have a record of these discussions and their contact with me over email then.
However that isn’t the purpose of this post. Some more serious issues have arisen that need to be addressed with the media and I need to make my position on these matters quite clear.
At approximately 2pm today I left my house to leave for university and headed to my normal bus stop. I sadly just missed a bus which may have avoided this sorry saga. A few minutes after getting to the bus stop I was approached by a gentleman who asked if I was David Thorp which I confirmed and then they identified themselves as a freelance reporter for the daily mail. They then in a brief discussion for 5 minutes or so asked me some questions about this site and the work that I do. I answered with fairly stock answers which are contained elsewhere on this website and the encounter was concluded shortly after.
An article has now appeared on the mail website following this interview of which there are the following issues:
- It would seem the reporter had an accomplice with a zoom lens as a photograph of me was captured whilst I was waiting at the bus stop. Whilst I am fully aware this is not illegal from the photography degree I studied in the past I still consider this an invasion of my privacy
- The article in question makes reference to my house having a value of £70k. This is a further invasion of my privacy as whilst I had established they had been near my home I didn’t realise they had established my exact home. If anything the value of £70k also shows I am not getting rich from this and is also irrelevant because I rent my home from a housing association
- The article also included information and images of my wife who is nothing to do with The Strictly Spoiler and whose privacy has also been invaded (possibly more so)
In 2018 I implemented a media policy designed to eliminate the crap being said about me and this website in the press by preventing the quoting of material from this website. Clearly someone at the Daily Mail didn’t get the memo as I have counted 3 online or offline articles containing copyrighted content from this website without an appropriate acknowledgment of the source of this content in the last week. As such the Daily Mail will be being invoiced for their use of this content at my standard rate of £500 per use shortly. They will also be receiving a complaint from my wife concerning the use of her image in their article in due course.
Please also be advised that I will be increasing my standard rate to £1000 effective immediately and this will cover any articles published after this notice has been.
Furthermore please be advised that if any members of the press approach me in the street (or elsewhere) again, take photos of me without my consent or come to my home (which is littered with CCTV both on my property and others in the neighbourhood) this will be considered an act of harassment under the protection from harassment act and damages will be sought. The same applies to any member of my family including my wife
Should the media seek a comment from me on any of my content or activities I can be reached on my social channels or by email to daveATstrictlyspoiler.com
Complaints to the Daily Mail (and probably at some point others)
10 Replies to “Strictly Spoiler 2022 – Note to editors”
Very well said, Dave. The media are a scourge. What happened to ‘free speech’? You don’t profit from your site in any way. You just offer a service for those who want to seek it out. That isn’t, and never will be, a crime.
I do actually profit from this site especially in the last few years but that profit is relatively minor
I am sorry that they have put you in the position to need to post this.
Well done. Well said. Stay strong.
This is all just to get the media attention for the papers themselves. If people really are so shocked at finding out the result on Saturday night – then they can always just stop reading the Spoiler.
Sad that you have had to do this but you must protect your family and wife. They have no business taking photos and publishing them without your consent!! And even less so pictures of your wife.
I am, of course, utterly unsurprised that the Daily Mail would act in this way; their journalism remains among the lowest of the low, and this is absolutely on-brand. But I’m still sad that you’re the victim of their shitfuckery.
If the press have used an image that can identify you as a individual without your consent, then they have likely contravened GDPR and could potentially be fined by the ICO. You should look this up.
Actually, John, it’s likely that you *couldn’t* (though the point about harassment still stands) https://law.photography/law/street-photography-laws-in-the-uk
Yeah I studied photography some time ago so am aware that nothing illegal was done by photographing me in the street. It was of course amoral though