Reporting and Writing I

Reporting and Writing I Ethics & code of conduct

www.societyofeditors.co.uk • Resources • Code of conduct • More about the code Every journalist should carry a copy of the Code of Conduct Go to the Society of Editors to download yours You can also order a pocket-friendly folded version from the website It is written and enforced by journalists – key to self-regulation Code of Conduct

Leveson will publish his report into media culture, ethics and practices this year. His recommendations will take in the code of conduct and the regulatory structure of newspapers. We will look in more depth at this after it is published. Context

1949 The first Royal Commission on the Press recommends the forming of a general council to regulate press standards. It is the first hint of statutory regulation of newspapers. The commission was called in response to address fears that a concentration of media ownership was affecting press standards, allowing inaccuracy, and giving advertisers undue influence. The General Council of the Press was formed in response. Its members were all newspaper editors, and it was funded by newspaper owners. 1953 History of press regulation

1962 Amid concerns that the General Council was a vested interest group, the Press Council was formed. A fifth of its members were laypeople – i.e. did not work in the newspaper business. But during the 1980s newspapers came under increasing criticism for their ethical standards, and for lacking accuracy. The Chilcott Inquiry was formed to examine regulation in 1990. 1980s History of press regulation

General Election 1983: “Do you really want this old fool to run Britain?” Headline with picture of Labour leader Michael Foot, 69 By-election 1984: Quoted an American scientist saying that Labour MP Tony Benn was “insane” on day of by-election. The scientist denounced the story, and denied saying it. 1980s

1990 The Chilcott Inquiry gives the industry 18 months to prove self-regulation, backed by a written code of conduct, can work. The Press Complaints Commission is formed to oversee newspapers and magazines The Society of Editors draws up a code of conduct The PCC adjudicates on alleged breaches of the code. It has 17 members, of whom 10 do not work in the trade and seven are editors. It negotiates settlements – it cannot impose fines It publishes rulings as “good practice” It publishes guidance on ethics and standards. History of press regulation

Chair Lord Hunt of the Wirral Editors Ian Carter editorial director, Kent Messenger Ian MacGregor editor, The Sunday Telegraph Donald Martin Editor in chief, D.C. Thompson Lindsay Nicholson Editorial director, Good Housekeeping Tina Weaver Former editor, Sunday Mirror Peter Wright Editor Emeritus, Associated Newspapers + one editorial vacancy PCC committee members

2011- now Phone hacking scandal Leveson inquiry established July 2011 First sat in November 2011 PCC will be replaced or changed, and has entered a “transitional phase” in preparation. Hacked Off – campaign for statutory backstop for press regulation, similar to Ofcom for broadcasters. Free Speech Network – association of newspapers and academics in favour of self-regulation. The future of regulation

The issue: 5 million stories published every year (SoE) The form of press regulation will make very little difference to most of them Public interest Sometimes reporters have to bend or break the rules to get the story. Under the Code of Conduct, this is allowed under the right conditions if the story is in the public interest. Much power rests on: Who defines the public interest and Who determines how it should be served The public interest

The Daily Telegraph tried to use the Freedom of Information Act Details were only released with heavy redactions But the full story eventually came out, after the Telegraph paid £110,000 for discs containing the full expenses details Paying for the stolen discs was unethical and potentially illegal The Telegraph said it did so in the public interest.

John Darwin “died” in a canoeing accident in March 2008. Except, he didn’t. He fled to Panama while his wife cashed in their life insurance. A suspicious Sky journalist hacked into Darwin’s email account and discovered he was alive and conspiring with his wife. The hacking was justified in the public interest.

Lobbying firm Bell Pottinger complained to the PCC last year after an Independent journalist, posing as a cotton trader from Uzbekistan, secretly filmed its lobbyists boasting about their access to David Cameron and other senior government officials. The use of clandestine devices is normally unethical But the PCC said it was the only way to reveal an important story in the public interest

There is no legal definition – only guidelines used by the PCC. Whenever it is invoked, editors must prove that they reasonably believe publication is in the public interest. Definition: • i) Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety • ii) Protecting public health and safety • iii) Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation • There is a public interest in the freedom of expression itself The public interest

How it applies It is only an exception to some sections of the code E.g. there is no public interest defence to publishing something discriminatory. Privacy Harassment Children Children in sex cases Hospitals Reporting of crime Clandestine devices Payments to criminals Public interest

Key issue A state regulator would have the right to define what is in the public interest. In the wrong hands, it would be a tool for censorship. E.g. The Daily Telegraph believes it has a new expenses scandal. MPs are renting homes to each other, and keeping the cash. Speaker John Bercow is resisting publication of a list of MPs’ landlords, claiming it is a security risk. But does the public interest case outweigh that? Public interest

1. Accuracy 3. Privacy • Do not publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or pictures • Significant errors corrected with “due prominence” • Distinguish clearly between “comment, conjecture and fact”. • Everyone is entitled to respect for their private and home life • Editors must justify intrusions made without consent • It is unacceptable to photograph people in private places without their consent Society of Editors’ Code

Sir Paul McCartney was photographed with his children outside Notre Dame cathedral in Paris shortly after the death of his wife, Linda. Hello magazine ran pictures of them mourning both inside and outside the cathedral. After they were published, McCartney complained to the PCC. Privacy

Hello’s defence PCC judgement • They were not taken in a private place – the church was open to others at the time • They illustrated the close bond between the family at a difficult time • The complaint was upheld • The panel agreed the church was not a private place per se • But McCartney had a reasonable expectation of privacy while mourning in a church • The magazine had to write an apology to the McCartneys Privacy

4. Harassment 5. Intrusion into grief • Do not engage in harassment or persistent pursuit • Do not continue calling or photographing people after being asked to stop • Approached must be made with sympathy and discretion • When reporting suicide, care should be taken to avoid excessive detail about the method used Society of Editors’ Code

This section of the code was added after the death of Princess Diana. In 2007, Kate Middleton complained after a Mirror photographer followed her down a road as she drank coffee. No ruling was made – the Mirror agreed never to publish the pictures and the matter was dropped. Harassment

Last year Pippa Middleton complained about this picture of her sunbathing was published, also by the Mirror. The story was written as if the pictures were new… but they were five years old. She said they were used gratuitously… The Mirror again agreed never to use the pictures again, and the matter was dropped. However, the pictures still spread freely on the internet. Harassment

Veterans minister Andrew Robathan MP complained to the PCC after Sunday Mirror journalists followed him for 13 miles in his car in Oct 2011. It was the day before a report was published into the health effects of nuclear bomb tests for those present. After being followed for 25 minutes, he got out his car and confronted the driver who identified himself as a journalist and attempted to interview him at the roadside. Robathan drove off. Harassment

Sunday Mirror’s case PCC verdict • The report, on a serious issue, was given a low-profile release with a poor quote from Robathan. • When they went to his house to interview him they found it was on a private road. Not wanting to trespass, they waited for him. • After Robathan declined to speak at the roadside, they left him alone. • No doubt that the journalists had pursued the MP. • But it only happened once, there was no evidence it was aggressive, and they went away when told to. • They were seeking a comment on a public interest issue. • Complaint not upheld Harassment

Case studyIn 2001, a reporter on a regional weekly newspaper was told by his editor to interview the family of a 16- year-old girl who had killed herself. The family declined, saying they would be in touch if they changed their mind. The reporter, on a deadline, called a further four times to ask for details. What did the PCC say? Verdict The PCC said it understood the difficulty in getting details on such tragic stories – BUT “common sense” should have told the reporter that repeated approaches to a grieving family were not appropriate. Harassment

This type of story is often referred to as a “death knock”. How would you approach it? Harassment

6. Children cont. • A child under 16 cannot be approached on issues involving their own or another child’s welfare without the consent of an adult • Pupils must not be approached or photographed at school without permission • Minors must not be paid for material involving children’s welfare, neither should parents or guardians unless it is clearly in the child’s interest • The fame of an adult does not justify intrusion into the life of a child Society of Editors’ Code

Zoo magazine used a picture of the crowd from the Chelsea v Liverpool FA Cup semi final in 2006. It showed a father and daughter both making rude hand gestures towards the pitch. The father complained to the PCC. Children

The complaint PCC verdict • The father said the image was purposefully used to ridicule his young daughter. • He said the image could have been pixellated to obscure her identity. • While the picture did clearly show a child making an obscene gesture, it happened in a very public place in full view of the crowd and TV cameras. • The father knew the game would be televised. • That meant there was “implied consent” for the picture to be used. Children

7. Children in sex cases cont. • Even if legally free to do so, the press should not identify children under 16 who are involved in sex offences. • In coverage of a trial: • Do not identify the child • The adult can be identified • The word “incest” cannot be used if it will identify a child victim • Care must be taken not to publish anything that implies a relationship between the accused and the child. Society of Editors’ Code

12. Discrimination 10. Hacking / secret recording • Do not be prejudicial on the grounds of race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation, illness or disability • Do not obtain or publish material from hidden cameras or other secret devices, or details from intercepted emails, photographs or other digitally-held private information. Society of Editors’ Code

In 2010, Mazher Mahmoud – the Fake Sheikh – exposed match fixing by the Pakistan cricket team during a tour in England. He secretly filmed a bookmaker agreeing with three cricketers that they would deliberately bowl no-balls at specific points in the match. Clandestine devices

No fishing No alternatives • Secretly filming someone in the hope they do something illegal – or even on a vague hunch they might – is unethical. • Editors demand rigorous background work to establish a watertight public interest case before approving any kind of secret investigation. • The public interest case can only be made if secret filming is the only way to get the story. • If you could do it through more conventional means you should (even if that’s a harder path). • The match-fixers would never have admitted it in other circumstances. Secret filming

In 2010, Daily Telegraph reporters posed as constituents and attended various MPs surgery sessions. They engaged MPs, including Vince Cable, in seemingly casual conversations, which were secretly filmed. Cable boasted he had “declared war on Murdoch” – and was later stripped of his responsibility to oversee the BSkyB buyout bid.

Telegraph’s defence PCC verdict • Secretly filming the sessions put MPs at ease and made them speak more honestly than they would if they knew it was being filmed. • The resulting stories were clearly in the public interest • It exposed the inner divisions in the new coalition government • There was public interest in revealing the thoughts of coalition members • BUT the Telegraph had gone about it the wrong way • Posing as constituents undermined our democratic process – a different method should have been sought Secret filming

After Boyzone singer Stephen Gately died, Jan Moir of the Daily Mail wrote a column speculating on the circumstances. Referring to his homosexuality, she described his final hours as “sleazy” and “less than respectable” . It was published the day before his funeral. The PCC received a record 25,000 complaints. What did it rule? Discrimination

Mail’s case PCC verdict • It is not possible to defame someone who has died • Extreme opinions can be published, so long as they are honestly held and do not fall foul of other laws BUT • Complainants all said her views were homophobic and an intrusion into grief • It pushed how far newspapers could be “unpalatable and offensive” under free speech • “Wide anger” understandable • But “robust opinion sparks vigorous debate” and the whole row was a sign of the “healthy system” of free speech. • It was “uncomfortable with the tenor” of the article, but did not uphold the complaint Discrimination

You hear that a group of students on campus have formed an extreme right wing group and holding meetings in private. No non-white or gay students are allowed to join, and rumours are that they have a private Facebook page where they spread hate messages about other students. The privacy settings mean you cannot see this page. However, you find a PC in the library which is logged on to a user account that can see the page. You copy names, details and pictures from the page. Can you use them to write a story? Case study

Issues How to do it • Privacy – the Facebook page is private. • Clandestine measures – you have essentially “hacked” their page, as you have unauthorised access. • Truth – you’ve heard rumours, but is it just a sick joke? • Public interest in the story gives you the right to use the material as long as the story is true • Talk to the people involved • Talk to university and police sources • Find out if complaints about these specific named people have been made Case study

Be careful People post jokes and ironic statements – don’t take them out of context. Don’t assume someone’ s profile picture is of them! E.g. Maidstone man killed in road crash – KM used a pic of his brother by mistake. It cost them £2,000 and a very embarrassing apology. Using social media

Reporting and Writing I