You Know Who

Normally when I write a blog, I try to discuss a light subject, insert humour, and above all make the piece an enjoyable one to read.

However, in recent times I have been asked on numerous occasions about a subject which has had a great impact on those involved – much of it negative. For that reason, I have chosen to respond via a blog that, on this occasion, is serious.

Rather than immediately pass judgement, I will first remind readers of the situation.

Say you’re a man earning a decent amount of money at your trade – some may argue too much – and you’re fairly happy. Everything’s going well and you have a pretty good reputation.

You know who I’m talking about.

But then an opportunity comes up. Well, not so much an opportunity, but the chance to shake up your personal life. One conversation has now led to bigger things and, rather than battle the new elephant in the room, you choose to go with it and, thus, undergo a radical lifestyle change.

You know who I’m talking about.

At first it seems innocent: after all, nobody knows what you’re doing. But after a while, very subtle hints are dropped not necessarily about what you’re doing, but about the identity of the man at the focal point of what is now a dark mystery.

You know who I’m talking about.

Pretty soon, the rumours are swirling and, suddenly, you’re in trouble. You’ve managed for years without people knowing; now, people could find out. And if the truth comes out, it won’t just affect you, but your company, your family, your friends; everything in life.

You know who I’m taking about.

Legal action is taken to have your identity remain a secret. But then, one day, your name is mentioned in connection with the story. Pretty soon, it’s a matter of when, as opposed to if, it’s revealed that you are the man at the centre of the story. Eventually, you give up and accept whatever comes your way. It was you all along.

You must know who I’m talking about.

I’m not going to pass judgement on the story that led to the controversy. I will instead look at what aggravated the situation: legal action.

Stories like this have been in the news many times before. On this occasion, however, the injunction has led to a guessing game about the man’s identity, in turn creating more interest – and making the man in question look far worse. That’s the story, if you think about it. The controversy may have been the subject, but the injunction made it front page news.

Had it come out one day that this man was responsible, it would have resulted in some unwelcome press. But I doubt that the criticism would have been as bad as it ended up being due to the injunction.

The man in question has since been trying to move on. He hopes to get life back to the way things were. And I hope he does: despite the controversy, he had a happy, successful life before all this happened, and it would be sad for him to be remembered primarily for this incident.

The good news for the man in question is that, after a while, the papers lose interest and slowly, the story fades away. But the memories don’t. Indeed, the regret will be felt for a long time, and the subject will always remain a taboo one to discuss with him.

In conclusion, then, I believe that the legal action made this a bigger story than it was, and may serve as a deterrent to others about using an injunction in the future. And, although the man has come out of the situation looking worse than he had beforehand, the hope is that he can move on and, hopefully, won’t be remembered solely for the story that dominated news headlines, and the resultant mystery surrounding his identity.

Speaking of which, you do know who I have been talking about, don’t you?

Of course, it was . . . Ben Collins being revealed as The Stig.

What, you thought I meant someone else?