[Closed] Did I miss the Gareth Thomas thread?

That's low. The journalist better watch his back, hissing someone the size of Gareth off is not a good idea.

HIV isn't the death sentence like it was (quite treatable now I believe), so why the hell does it matter. Low life media scum.

I'd be empted to let it be known who did this, if I was Gareth.

It was discussed on the rugby thread a bit, ****ing awful behaviour by some utter ****s. The Ben Stokes stuff from the Sun is of a similar nature too.

I’d be empted to let it be known who did this, if I was Gareth.

Yep

I respect that he may not want to, but I rather hope he does - I'd love to know who to express an opinion to.

I'd like to think that this and the Ben Stokes story in the Sun yesterday might result in some sort of common sense public interest test being applied by the press. But I suspect the clicks will be worth more than the integrity.

Missed the T off my 'empted'...

There is nothing better than responding to 'bullies' by getting your "revenge" legally and honestly. Easily done on a TV interview.

I met him recently and he is a thoroughly decent, humble and lovely chap. While the Stokes thing to me is different as it is a matter of public note anyway and has been since 1988 Gareth’s breach of confidentiality is unacceptable. He’s a bit of a hero to me in many ways. But I mean really we live in a country where the masses believe the histrionics and filth published by the Mail, Express and Sun pervade and pollute minds. I’ll stop now. Scum.

But I suspect the clicks will be worth more than the integrity.

I suspect Boris can't throw his own dead cats on the table fast enough

There is nothing better than responding to ‘bullies’ by getting your “revenge” legally and honestly. Easily done on a TV interview.

Which gives the story more legs and generates more clicks for the offending papers.

Offensive stories go viral and we all decide we want to click on/share. That means a story about Gareth Thomas being HIV+ gets shared on STW etc and goes viral while a quality serious story gets read by the people who read the paper, and them alone. We shouldn't blame the papers, we should blame ourselves. (...and I include myself - I never share shite journalism but when someone shares the latest outrage from the media I often can't help but go to read the story in one source or another.)

Not that I'm being defensive, but... 🙂 I heard the original story on t'radio, I only linked it here for reference, the key thing is that the original story would not have broken if journalists hadn't threatened to break it irrespective of his wishes. That ain't right, man.

Really good interview with him this morning on 5 live link and it brought a tear to my eye when he was talking about his parents.

He also mentions that his HIV is not transmittable which was news to me as I assumed everyone who has HIV could pass it on, but apparently not link

Watch BBC1 at 10:35 tonight for his story.

the key thing is that the original story would not have broken if journalists hadn’t threatened to break it irrespective of his wishes. That ain’t right, man.

It's not right, it's disgusting. I was so angry about it I clicked on the BBC story and read it. That's the problem.

I'm not having a go at you personally Pondo, we all do it, that's why it works so well and that's why they do it.

No sweat, dude - you've made me realise that I do, too. 🙁

Watch BBC1 at 10:35 tonight for his story.

Hang on, I smell a rat. Have they made a 60 minute documentary and scheduled it in 3/4 days?

If he hasn't got the money to take on a tabloid in the courts, I will happily donate if he sets up a crowd funder.
it is beyond low what the journalist did

Has he said when he first became infected ?

Is that relevant to anything? I'm just thinking that you probably don't hear a fanfare.

No and why should he, and would he know anyway? Testing positive in a routine blood test may be totally removed from any past infection event.

I develop new HIV drugs for my day job. Some of his comments about treatment and pills being a daily reminder were eye opening for me. I’m looking at monthly and possibly longer acting therapies.

It's time we took direct action against this type of journalism.

Our country is becoming a very unpleasant place.

A rent a quite from the "society of newspaper editors" was on bbc explaining how a free press was the jewel in the crown of any society. Utter dick.

Not at all surprised The S*n stooped so low. Again. ****ts.
Must be desperate for readers.

I develop new HIV drugs for my day job. Some of his comments about treatment and pills being a daily reminder were eye opening for me. I’m looking at monthly and possibly longer acting therapies.

It does frustrate me that they keep saying it's fine you can lead a normal life, taking a pill every morning because you've caught a disease isn't ideal. We shouldn't pretend medicine can solve everything. His mental health alone has taken a hell of a beating.

How on earth do the press get hold of this information, going to his dad who as he said deserves a private life. He's been forced to make this tv show. Surely someone's medical information is nobodies business however they've found out. Really felt sorry for him last night.

On a brighter note the rugby World Cup starts soon, hopefully we'll see him back on form on our screens.

Time for leading sports celebrities to stop talking to/working with The Sun. It's a shame that Sky isn't owned by News International any more, as they could stop giving post-match interviews to that lot as well.

The press are pretty disgusting but so are the actions of some celebs and their agents. The press use the stories on their way up and down but on the way down only the press ‘win’.
This is a nasty piece of ‘journalism’.

He’s been forced to make this tv show.

I'm not so sure. The press outed him at the weekend. 3 days later there's a 60 minute documentary? Seems quite tight time scales. I'm wondering if GT was going public this week anyway and the press heard about it because of that.

If you want something kept secret, don't make a documentary about it.

For me it comes down to which came first, the making and scheduling of the documentary or the press outing. Anyone know?

Obviously making the documentary took time, but he’d suppressed the story legally since last year. He took the decision to go public to end the legal tussle and iron man Wales was his chosen date.

There are rules regarding press embargo and release of information, perhaps you weren’t aware of how that works. But this is an obvious example.

Imagine how much of a **** you have to be to tell someone's parents that their son is HIV positive just so you can try and advance your pathetic career.

Do you think they feel any guilt at all? Who would want to be friends with that type of person? Who would want to be married to that type of person? They are beyond scum.

Obviously making the documentary took time, but he’d suppressed the story legally since last year. He took the decision to go public to end the legal tussle and iron man Wales was his chosen date.

So all you had to do was check the TV schedules and see "Gareth Thomas: HIV and Me"? If the name of the TV show is out in the public domain, then how have the papers really done anything wrong?

The only paper which did something wrong is The Sun, which approached his parents long before the documentary was made and broke the news of his HIV+ status. Which is a disgraceful breach of privacy, obviously.

I imagine that GT made various interviews on the issue available to the rest of the press under embargo before the documentary was listed for broadcast. They collectively decided to honour that, which, given the circumstances, was the only thing they could do.

Do you think they feel any guilt at all?

The film 'Nightcrawler' gives some insight into the personality type that actually enjoys doing this kind of thing.

So all you had to do was check the TV schedules and see “Gareth Thomas: HIV and Me”? If the name of the TV show is out in the public domain, then how have the papers really done anything wrong?

I only half watched it but I think they introduced it as a "schedule change" so presume something else was listed as a placeholder.

It does frustrate me that they keep saying it’s fine you can lead a normal life, taking a pill every morning because you’ve caught a disease isn’t ideal. We shouldn’t pretend medicine can solve everything. His mental health alone has taken a hell of a beating.

I think he covered quite well how the medication did allow him to physically lead a normal life, but discussed his mental health and how taking the medication reminded him every day.

only half watched it but I think they introduced it as a “schedule change” so presume something else was listed as a placeholder.

Which means it was due out in another couple of weeks but we brought it forward for more viewers while the "outrage" was fresh in the mind

For clarity, it's quite clear in the documentary that it was all part of a carefully orchestrated plan to release the news in time with the Ironman event, but the announcement had to be hastily brought fwd due to the Sun's activity.

The guy is a bloody inspiration, and has gone from a glittering rugby career to literally changing many people's lives for the better, in many ways.

The word hero is vastly overused these days, but applies here, I think.

The Sun, on the other hand, is a despicable instrument, who's greatest acheivement seems to be (mostly) covering the boobs up on page 3, and calling it "progress"...

Which means it was due out in another couple of weeks but we brought it forward for more viewers while the “outrage” was fresh in the mind

And if the media hadn't threatened to break the story in the first place, GT wouldn't have gone public at all.

And if the media hadn’t threatened to break the story in the first place, GT wouldn’t have gone public at all.

That makes no sense at all. You don’t make a TV documentary just in case..

Gareth Thomas always finds something newsworthy when there’s a big rugby tournament about to start and he has a documentary to promote.

No and why should he? What parts of your medical history would you care to share on STW and beyond? The point being YOU care to share rather than have sensationalised for public titivation in the “public interest”.

I was particularly taken by the close up of the photo of him, his parents and husband together. Looked to me like he has strong healthy relationships. But giving the hiv news to his parents was beyond the pale. Just despicable. As he said, they took away his one opportunity to have that conversation. And that wasn’t recent btw, that was some time ago, when the injunction was served.

Sorry, didn't mean to suggest it. *Rereads posts and can't see where he suggested it*

And that wasn’t recent btw, that was some time ago, when the injunction was served.

Linky? I can't find anything about an injunction over the HIV issue. As far as I can find the HIV issue came out this this weekend at exactly the right time to promote a documentary that had already been made and during the RWC when a raised media profile will mean £££s to him.

If he was forced to make a Documentary by a third party it's a hell of a coincidence that it is released at the perfect moment for him.

Which still paints the media in a terrible light but it's a different story to the one I've been reading.

Is that relevant to anything?

Well it is to those rugby players who may have been playing against him. Blood to blood contact is highly possible in a game of rugby.

It opens up an interesting debate about whether rugby players should be tested for HIV.

As for the man himself, I have great respect for him and what he has done to raise awareness/openness of his and others situations.

It opens up an interesting debate about whether rugby players should be tested for HIV.

...and verrucas. I used to get verrucas all the time when I was playing Rugby. Must've been the communal showers/bath.

I played rugby against Gareth a good few times, and i don't think it was of concern, knowing what the media is like was when he chose not to come out until his career was coming to an end and thats terrible in this day and age, he had the support of the Welsh team. He's a really nice bloke and pretty tasty on a bike having left me on many a hill on Etape Cymru a few years back.

I played rugby against Gareth a good few times ... He’s a really nice bloke and pretty tasty on a bike having left me on many a hill on Etape Cymru a few years back.

That's not even a humblebrag, it's just a brag.

Well it is to those rugby players who may have been playing against him. Blood to blood contact is highly possible in a game of rugby.

This is why the blood bin rule was brought in - so bleeding wounds could be sealed up without the team being a player short.

No they should not be tested for HIV. the best way is to use precautions for EVERY situation and get anyone with a bleeding wound off the pitch quickly. allways treat ALL blood as if its infected with everything

Such a shitty thing to happen. I'm glad he's called them out on it. I know a lot of people in the public eye would have folded under pressure and offered them an 'exclusive interview' in exchange for a favourable headline.

A lot of what's left of the press in the UK are deplorable. There's always been arseholes, but the good ones seem few and far between these days, it's sad that they are able to use the laws than ensure they can report on serious misdoings by people in power to create sleazy headlines to sell a few more clicks.

Linky? I can’t find anything about an injunction over the HIV issue. As far as I can find the HIV issue came out this this weekend at exactly the right time to promote a documentary that had already been made and during the RWC when a raised media profile will mean £££s to him.

Some serious cynicism. You won't find a link to the injunction - they are confidentital of course since granted - as are existence of the proceedings. But the course of events will have been as follows:

1) Journalist learns GT is HIV +ve from friend or colleague or friend of a friend who knows the fact
2) Journalist doorstops GT parent to "corroborate" information and get more data with plan to run a splash "in the public interest".
3) GT seeks injunction to prevent publication. This is granted and will not be made public - nor will the proceedings since it was granted.
4) A controlled release of information by JT is planned to include a documentary
5) A documentary is produced under embargo conditions for release at IM Wales

I very much doubt he took any appearance money, stated he had donated to Terrence Higgins Trust his appearance money from other events.

OK it will raise his media profile, but above what? He's Gareth Thomas.

The media works in ways in which people are often unfamiliar. There are rules.

The Sun on Sunday had a "exclusive" story in August that "a British sports star is set to publicly announce that they are HIV positive"
The Sun
Odds on it was one of their journalists that door stepped GT's parents.

I know it may not be the most popular question, but when was he aware that he was HIV+, was it during his playing career? If so, were all his opposing competitors and medical staff at the ground informed? If not I can see law suits coming his way.

I'd assume it was certainly pre 2016 when he married his partner, who isn't infected.

There will be no law suits. The RFU make no requirements for HIV disclosure. Nor does my workplace for that matter. What is likely is that within days of a positive diagnosis (at any date) a patient will begin antiretroviral therapy and will with a week or two have completely undetectable viral load. (Being HIV positive does not mean you have transmisible virus, it means your body has mounted an immune response to HIV virus and you have detectable antibodies against the virus). That has been standard of care for many years now. With ART there is no transmission risk. Previous therapies were taken as multiple tablets, several times a day. Concealing this to others will have been challenging to patients. Modern therapies combine two, three or four drugs into a single tablet, taken once every day (for the rest of the patients life).

Now there is an occasion where disclosure of HIV is helpful, and that is when other medicines are to be administered. Pain for example in rugby players springs to mind. One of the HIV drugs is used to also block the metabolism of others. This drug (ritonavir) also block metabolism of many other drugs, so their doses may need adjusting to prevent accidental overdose.

Btw, your question is not unreasonable, but merely a reflection of the general ignorance surrounding HIV and the legacy of a well-meaning and dramatic publicity campaign from the 80’s. Sadly the documentary was right in that the public have not been kept up to date with modern HIV prevention and treatment.

In rugby, the management of blood injuries is to prevent accidental transmission, which is very low already. There are far more transmissible infectious agents than untreated HIV. Hepatitis virus is a good example.

Btw, your question is not unreasonable, but merely a reflection of the general ignorance surrounding HIV and the legacy of a well-meaning and dramatic publicity campaign from the 80’s.

Thanks for explaining at an understandable level, very helpful 👍

And that wasn’t recent btw, that was some time ago, when the injunction was served.

Linky? I can’t find anything about an injunction over the HIV issue.

You won’t find a link to the injunction – they are confidentital of course since granted – as are existence of the proceedings.

If true, your original claim that there was on injunction must have been fabricated.

..but it isn't true. If there had been a Super injunction it would no longer be secret for two reasons:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_law#Disclosure

I'm not convinced the timing is an accident. As others have said it takes time to make a documentary and I'm quite sure in media circles who is making documentaries about what is quite well known. I'm quite sure that several people will have already seen the programme on pre release for the media. I would be interested to know how and when he contracted the disease especially as a player in a game noted for glose contact and blood been split

I would be interested to know how and when he contracted the disease

WTF has it got to do with you? Would you like him to draw a picture and sign it for you?

Watched it last night.

A very brave decision, sensitively filmed and clearly an emotional journey for him that I hope has only positive effects on his long term mental health.

As others have said it takes time to make a documentary and I’m quite sure in media circles who is making documentaries about what is quite well known. I’m quite sure that several people will have already seen the programme on pre release for the media

Agree. "Press got wind of GT's HIV status because of the Documentary" seems more likely than "Press found out GT was HIV (how?) & forced the production of a documentary before the press could publish the story".

The Sun article from August totally supports that timeline.

WTF has it got to do with you?

None of it is anything to do with any of us, and yet here were are talking about it and consuming media about it.

and yet here were are talking about it and consuming media about it.

Most of us were being critical of media and showing support for Alfie not wanting more info about what he should have been able to keep private, but then maybe most of us have different values.

Most of us were being critical of media and showing support for Alfie

Doesn't matter it's all clicks, the advertisers media don't GAF if the people tuning in support it or not they make the same money from someone who loves the story as they do from the people who hate it.

I despise this story, the press and much of the media, I still couldn't resist clicking on the link above to the Sun's article to see what it said first hand and I've read everything on the BBC about this, but I've managed to resist the documentary itself. (Even though, personally, I'm pretty convinced he made it of his own free choice.)

We have people in this thread who think GT was forced to make a documentary against his will and then tuned in to watch the thing he was forced to make!!!!

The press are the symptom, *we* are the problem, the worse the media is the more we consume it. This thread is the classic example.

If true, your original claim that there was on injunction must have been fabricated.

My claim that there was an injunction was based on GT’s statement on the documentary that he sought and was granted an injunction. That means it does not become public.

As for “forced” to make, I think his hand was forced by the media intrusion. He stated he had no plans to reveal his HIV status - and why should he? He had previously revealed he was gay. I see no disparity here. He stated he wanted to remove the sword of Damocles of further potential media intrusion and going public would be the way to do it. The sun’s article was clearly published in spite and was carefully written so as not to break either an injunction or embargo because he spoke to the Mirror and probably a few other journalists on other papers. They will have been aware of this.

My claim that there was an injunction was based on GT’s statement on the documentary that he sought and was granted an injunction.

So far from secret it was actually mentioned in the documentary. Ok, so there *was* an injunction over JT's HIV status. [1] When was it? If it was August around the time of the Sun story, it still seems likely the source of the story was the documentary. If it was much earlier I'd assume it's the other way round.

[1] I'm assuming you're not getting confused with the earlier injunction over his sexuality.

No, he stated he took out an injunction over his HIV status. Presumably about the time they wanted to publish, which I think was when they confronted his father last year.

Whilst not a super-injunction, all such injunctions are anonymised if granted. So it would not be possible to identify it against any other “News International# vs XYZ” case listed and I’m sure there are plenty of those 😉

He also stated he couldn’t afford to maintain it, presuming it would be challenged in court. So what to do?

#other media outlets are available, but it looks like it were the Sun that dun it.

Presumably about the time they wanted to publish, which I think was when they confronted his father last year.

Well, if we find that out the timing of all that we'll have our answer.

He also stated he couldn’t afford to maintain it, presuming it would be challenged in court. So what to do?

Yup, the media suck and you need cash to defend yourself from them and yes, that puts people in a position where they are forced to disclose stuff that's private. No doubt about all of that. The question is did that happen this time. ie Did the documentary trigger the press interest or vice versa. Given the only media story we can find on this is from August, the first story to name him was this weekend and the Documentary was out this week I suspect it was the former. If it transpires that ~6 months or more ago JT got an injunction to keep his HIV status out of the media then I'd suspect it was the latter.

I think the Sun story in August was them trying their luck having been thwarted by the injunction and needing a "spoiler" because they were left out of the forthcoming media show. But yes, the timing of events is important. He did say the doorstepping was last year, so I'm inclined to think that was the timing of the injunction - that and how long it takes to make a documentary.

It also showed him basically learning to swim - and that will have taken some time too. He was pretty rubbish at the start! He said he was always handy on a bike though (phew!).

Semi related but more stunningly disgusting behaviour from gutter press

https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1175379503402627077?s=19

I can't even fathom why they would do this. He's a vocal anti brexit voice. As tensions continue to rise, there's no telling what some unhinged lunatic could do. The MoS is basically inciting violence.

How do we solve this, yet still retain a free press?

There's no way that should be legal. 🙁

WTF has it got to do with you?

Us personally nothing, but he has now shared to the world that he has HIV, and shared to the world that he is gay, yet he won’t say when he found out he had HIV. Something potentially in the closet there which he doesn’t want to share.

Semi related but more stunningly disgusting behaviour from gutter press

As long as the nutters don't have Google, he should be OK.

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10503667.amp/

Something potentially in the closet there which he doesn’t want to share.

SFW? it’s nobody’s business but him and his partners at the time - maybe he doesn’t want to compromise their privacy?

As long as the nutters don’t have Google, he should be OK.

The difference being, this is targeted now because of his brexit stance. Of course anyone can find out where someone lives but this is an invitation to target the guy and his family