Press Case Studies

KEY QUESTIONS:

• Which clauses of the code are relevant to these cases?
• Do you think that the Code of Practice was broken in any of these cases? If so, why?
• Could a public interest justification be made in any of these examples?

1. A man vs. Northwich Guardian:

• Newspaper linked with YouTube video of group throwing a petrol bomb on a train
• The father of a 15 year old complained it to be invasion of privacy of a child and his face should have been pixelated
• Related issue: (6) Children should be free to complete school without intrusion/images of his welfare
• The code wasn't broken as video was in a public domain
• The newspaper argued for public interest as they have a right to know of the dangerous behaviour occuring

2. A man vs. Zoo magazine:

• Photo and comments of a 10 year old girl and her father making offensive hand gestures in the crowd of an FA Cup match (described as 'terrace bigotry')
• The man says his daughter has been ridiculed and her face should have been pixelated (as it was in other magazines)
• Related issue: (6) Children under 16 require adult consent of photographs used
• The code was broken as despite being a public space, it is her father who is in the wrong, she doesn't deserve to be ridiculed. Her father also didn't give consent
• There is only public interest on grounds of the father's picture and the abuse in football crowds

3. A man vs. The Sunday Times:

• Journalist approached 14 year old boy with £1000 for a photo of a suspect of a fatal stabbing at his school
• Parent claims the journalist spoke at length with their son and the boy's father has since removed him from school
• Related issues: (6) Children must not be paid and have the right to complete school without intrusion, (15) Witness in criminal trials must not be paid
• The code was breached however the newspaper denies what the complainent accuses, and no photos/comments of the boy were published, therefore the PCC have no obligation to uphold the complaint
• There is no public interest in this part of the case - when someone found guilty/other features of the murder may be of importance

4. A woman vs. The Independent:

• Article of a West End actress published about her unproffesionality in withdrawing from a play due to pregnancy, despite her not telling anyone other than partner/producer/agent
• She has subsequently had a miscarriage and had not given her consent to the information being public
• Relevant issue: (3) Privacy and respect of life and health
• Code was breached as pre 3 months it is not public information as the pregnancy is less viable
• No public interest as it is a private matter and no-one need no of her miscarriage

5. A woman vs. The Sun:

• Published photo of woman jumping to her death before her identity had been made known
• Friend of woman complained photo was unnessecary and distressing and the newspaper was disgusting and voyeuristic
• Relevant issues: (5) Intrusion into grief and shock involving cases of grief/shock and excessive details of suicide, (3) Privacy and respect for life and health
• Code was breached as the photos are insensitive at a distressing time (Sun published condolences and apologies for distressed caused), however minimal unpleasent details of death
• No public interest as issue is private at this time

6. A woman vs. Eastbourne Gazette:

• Family of motorcycle accident have been approached by reporter, and despite him coming out of a coma and asking to desist the journalist left a message and phoned
• Relevant issues: (3) Privacy of health/life, (4) Harassment and no questioning when asked to desist, (8) Hospitals must obtain permission from executive before entering
• Breach of code as victim asked to desist and journalist invaded privacy of his health and the hospital
• No public interest angle can be claimed

7. A police officer vs. The Sunday Telegraph:

• An officer posted on his FaceBook 'our lot have killed again, s*** happens' and was reported in a case of a policewomans husband being a nazi sympathiser
• He accused paper of reported private comments and she accused them of taking unconsentual photos of her house
• Relevant issues: (3) Privacy of health/life/home, (10) Clandestine devices and subterfuge
• The code wasn't in breached on grounds of subterfuge in his case as he added the journalist as a friend, however in her case they didn't respect her private life and home
• Public interest to know the racist views of a police officer/associated sympathies with extreme views as the BNP

8. Paul McCartney vs. Hello!:

• Photos taken of him and his children in Paris as well as him lighting a candle/meditating for his deceased wife Linda
• He accused them of "highly intrusive photographs of us in our most private moments at this very difficult and private in our lives"
• Relevant issues: (3) Privacy, (5) Intrusion into grief or shock
• Code was breached as he was going through a hard emotional time through recent death and his celebrity status should be irrelavent in his privacy at this time
• No public interest in knowing his actions