News

Smart: Hugh Grant's health scare story 'in public interest'

09/01/2012

A Sun article containing private information about Hugh Grant rushing to hospital has been defended by showbiz editor Gordon Smart.

He told the Leveson Inquiry that he had discussed the story - published in March 2011 - with his team and decided that it was in the public interest given Grant’s celebrity status and the fact that he was in a public place.

The article described Grant as feeling faint and short of breath and sat “without making any fuss” in a hospital waiting room. It also states that a spokesman for the actor was approached for comment but that this was declined.

Smart said that he had a “duty to his readers” to publish the story. He added: “I’m not passing the buck - I handled it very sensitively…It appeared on page three as a six-par story. It was probably the least important story on that page.”

He agreed with Mr Jay, counsel to the inquiry, when the point of Grant’s level of celebrity was raised, admitting that this tipped the balance in publishing the story.

Grant described how details of his medical records had been published in the Sun and Daily Express when he gave evidence to the inquiry in November last year.

He told Lord Justice Leveson that he had suffered from years of press invasion into his private life, included intrusion into his relationship with Tinglan Hong, the mother of his baby daughter, and being chased by paparazzi photographers on numerous occasions.

Grant also told the inquiry that he believed members of the press was responsible for a break-in at his London flat in 1995, after details of the interior were described in a national paper.

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

A year and two days: the story of one complaint to IPSO
Guest blog: Chris Goodall's complaint about fifteen errors in a Daily Mail article took IPSO a year and two days to decide. Here he publishes the full timeline — more than 80 emails, hundreds of hours of work, and one correction.
9/22/26
News
SLAPPs and the press: why the Anti-SLAPP Bill is the wrong answer
The private members Bill promoted by Baroness Stowell and Sir John Whittingdale would apply to any claim touching a matter of public interest, however meritorious and however properly brought. Hacked Off sets out why it would harm victims of press abuse, and why section 40 was the better answer.
9/21/26
News
Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News