Reader comments · Elton John loses defamation case against The Guardian · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Elton John loses defamation case against The Guardian

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Simon Murphy 12 Dec 2008, 6:10pm

    How humourless is Elton. I personally think the article was correct. His charity balls are quite grotesquely over the top.

  2. Elton’s comments in the United States were unhelpful. He is more and more of a liability.

  3. Reg has a very high opinion of himself. He’s a celeb, yes, but he isn’t the Queen (who is frequently satirised!)

    His CP was the only low-key, non-self-aggrandising event he’s done in decades

  4. “Elton John loses defamation case against The Guardian”

    Elton John is a #%&*

  5. How can anyone have any sympathy for EJ and his partner. personally I think their life style is a disgrace to the planet.

  6. Well, I’ve read the piece that was in The Guardian and I totally agree that it was offensive and deprecating to the extraordinary good work which Elton John has done for charities. The piece was undermining. Marina Hyde revealed a deeply unpleasant cynicism and a tragic lack of generosity. Maybe she’s envious that she was not invited. If Elton John & David Furnish throw lavish spectacles which manage to raise £10,000,000 for AIDS charities, they do not deserve such cruel insinuations as that of this Marina Hyde. Shame on her. And shame too on the High Court judge who did not rule in Elton’s favour. I have intimately known a gay High Court judge in the UK and what a sad self-hating figure he was. It’s a pity Elton’s case was not decided by a different judge.

  7. Not sure what to make of this. Having heard from an ex-work colleague who once had to decorate one of Elton’s charity bashes by plastering everything in gold leaf, it sounded as if the money spent on decorating the place was equal to the money raised by it. You could argue that money wouldn’t have been raised at all if it was just an ordinary celebrity bash, or you could equally argue he could’ve simply stuck the money spent decorating straight into the coffers of his charity of choice without going through this rediculous narcissistic backslapping charade.
    You could make a legitimate case either way, really.

  8. Robert, ex-pat Brit 13 Dec 2008, 7:25pm

    So Don, just exactly what is it about Elton and his partner’s “lifestyle” that you find so disgusting, compared to yours and everybody else’s, assuming you have one?

  9. Oh dear Robert, if we all lived like EJ and his ilk there would be no environment let alone resources to lavish on a select few. Maybe you haven’t noticed or care that global warming is a reality.Perhaps he could use his vast and to me unjustified wealth by directing it to where it is really needed.

  10. Just because Our Reg happens to be gay (or so I hear), it doesn’t mean that anyone needs to rush to his defence. This particular piece of litigation was, at best, precious and self-aggrandising, and at worst a legal challenge to freedom of the press.

    Marina Hyde made a rather delicious little dig at EJ again in the Guardian today: “Like so many sweet moments […] it was tinged with agony. That the victory came at the expense of Elton John – who is widely recognised as one of the loveliest guys in showbusiness – was tough to take. But I got on with my day as best I could.”

  11. It has to be admitted that fundraising is an art. Just ask people for vast amounts of money and few will just give it anonymously, without recognition, or without some kind of payoff! Fact. Look at the telethons on TV that raise millions for Children in Need and so forth. People give the money as a response to the entertainment and occasion which is given to them by the performers on television, and the performers (the newsreaders and celebrities who get up and perform the unusual) gain wider exposure. Everybody wins. It is a win-win situation. In the same way, Elton may plaster a place in gold-leaf, but he’s no fool: he knows the sums have got to add up, that the outlay on the gold-leaf has got to be covered but, more than that, it has to guarantee massive donations to the cause. Elton is splendid at the art of fund-raising. He does not deserve to be so hideously deprecated for the good he has done.

    This Marina Hyde is painting herself as another nit-picking mean little Guardian journo without a soul and without a heart. I am sure deep down inside she too is a nice person.

  12. Robert, ex-pat Brit 14 Dec 2008, 2:12pm

    Let the loudmouths and naysayers in the media put their money where their mouths are as Elton does raising millions of dollars to fight AIDS. He’s one of a few who have done more for humanity than anyone I know of. None of us is perfect, we all have our foibles, Elton notwithstanding. I’d like to see Marina Hynde’s cheque book register to see the last cheque she wrote for AIDS research and other life-threatening illnesses. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

  13. DavidLovesEltonAlwayHas 14 Dec 2008, 6:12pm

    Sorry to hear about your loss. I think I would have sued over having the most boring piece of tripe ever written, but then sorry, english humor has never woke me up. I love you Elton, you have inspired me beyond belief right down to my piano keys. Though I know as gay guys we can be quite teste about attacks on our good name, best leave the buzzards to the truly dead, which you are not and will never be. Bless you dear brother, you are a prince among men making life on this planet more enjoyable all the time.

  14. DavidWLovesEltonAlwayHas 14 Dec 2008, 6:15pm

    Sorry to hear about your loss. I think I would have sued over having the most boring piece of tripe ever written, but then sorry, English humor has never woke me up. I love you Elton, you have inspired me beyond belief right down to my piano keys. Though I know as gay guys we can be quite teste about attacks on our good name, best leave the buzzards to the truly dead, which you are not and will never be. Bless you dear brother, you are a prince among men and make life easier and more enjoyable every day you are here.

  15. This is a perfectly just result, and I am pleased that El;ton John has lost this case – a caser that should not have even got as far as the court in the fiorst place.

    In a democracy, to offend, criticise, lampoon, ridicule is a common right. It’s called freedom of expression. No-one, however pious or well meaning, should be immune from this. Even if that criticism is in poor taste. Otherwise, we are on the slippery slope to dictatorship and personality cults (look at the comment directly above, and replace ‘Elton’ with ‘Jesus’ or ‘Josef Stalin’ and you see what I mean).

    His charitable deeds and commitment to good causes, from AIDS to Watford FC, is beyond doubt. But even so, as don (above) reminds us, he has the air of Imelda Marcos about him. He needs knocking of his perch to be honest. Elton, be a little more thick skinned…

  16. AdrianT wrote:

    The above is incomplete, I am afraid. “In a democracy, to offend, criticise, lampoon, or ridicule is a common right WHERE THERE ARE GROUNDS FOR DOING SO!”

    What’s going on in this situation is that very LITTLE bunnies can’t get their heads around the psychology of major fundraising strategies. The little bunnies catch sight of a wall of gold leaf or an elaborate costume and screech, “Oooo, but that’s wasting money!”. Little bunnies know nothing about investment and return. They don’t know anything about economy. That’s why they will forever stay LITTLE BUNNIES! And it’s why LITTLE BUNNIES will never be able to contribute as much to causes as BIG BUNNIES like Elton John can.

  17. Eddy- you’re not calling me a little bunny are you? I think the question of investment and return is still open to debate.
    I’m still on the fence regarding whether Elton is a philanthropic genius or whether he just likes a good party and the charity thing is a secondary concern. Cute though they may be, ad-hominem bunny comparisons don’t really add to the debate.
    For my money, if you spend as much decorating your house as you raise for charity by doing so, that’s a slightly pointless exercise.
    I’m not saying Elton shouldn’t have parties to raise cash for charity, but when they’re that extravagent it does raise a few questions about where his priorities lie…
    Now if you don’t mind I have a lettuce to chew!

  18. Simon Murphy 15 Dec 2008, 3:03pm

    To those people who are defending Elton JOhn’s contribution to the gay cause I’d just like to remind them that he is also the singer who freely and coluntarily chose to sing with Eminem just months after Eminem had released his notoriously homophobic album (which included the supposedly ‘ironic’ lyrics “Do I hate fags? The answer is yes.”). Eminem was EXTREMELY popular at the time. And Elton John seems to lose all his integrity in his rush to be associated with all the hot artists. I find him to be repellant. A couple of years ago his accounts allegedly revealed he spent £250,000 PER YEAR on flowers. That is obscenely wasteful. As are his parties.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.