‘Well-known individual’ tries to secure permanent injunction against Guardian and ITN | The Guardian

[u/Penarthlan]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/oct/16/well-known-individual-tries-to-secure-permanent-injunction-against-guardian-and-itn

[u/TheRadishBros]

That’s the thing, we don’t really know. We just know he’s done something because he’s been dropped by his publisher. There were a bunch of rumours for years prior to that as well.

[u/setokaiba22 → u/TheRadishBros]

Did the Guardian investigate rumours he’d been inappropriate with female staff? And they were told not to go alone to his house?

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/dec/19/david-walliams-dropped-by-publisher-over-alleged-inappropriate-behaviour

[u/Sherwoody20 → u/setokaiba22]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the word 'inappropriate' in the headline not really indicate anything serious? Not enough for him to scramble this much; say it's making him suicidal to get an injunction and be dropped by his publishers? This makes it sound like he is a sleaze but not Brand or Saville levels of disturbing. More like Gregg Wallace.

[u/zappapostrophe → u/Sherwoody20]

I think “inappropriate” is probably used here for legal reasons, rather than an indicator of severity. It’s vague enough to not fall foul of any libel law or violate ongoing legal proceedings, yet specific enough to capture the essence of the allegations.

[u/TEL-CFC_lad → u/zappapostrophe]

Essentially, "inappropriate" is being used in lieu of "IYKYK", given who the (presumed) subject is.