Tweet, tweet.

There's some good in everything you see. I've never been able to understand Twitter, or see why anybody would be bothered to make use of it. But now it appears that the twitterati, as they are called, have struck a blow for the freedom of the press. It seems that, at the behest of a certain company, the courts issued an injunction forbidding the Guardian newspaper from publishing a certain Parliamentary question, or of any details which might be used to identify it. The Guardian instead ran the story of the ban, and apparently within minutes, tweets were appearing identifying the question and the company involved. As a result, the company are not proceeding further with their injunction. What I can't understand is how the injunction came to be issued in the first place - surely the reporting of Parliamentary business is privileged?