HACKEDOFF THECAMPAIGN FOR A FREE+ ACCOUNTABLEPRESS
REPORT ON THE RECOGNITION SYSTEM 2018 PRP CALL FOR INFORMATION
HACKED OFF SUBMISSION 8th October 2018
INTRODUCTION
I.1 Hacked Off campaigns for a free and accountable media and, in particular, for the implementation of the measures recommended by Lord Justice Leveson to ensure that the press is subject to independent and effective regulation.
I.2 At present the recognition system is not fully functional because the largest newspaper publishing groups have – as they have so many times before – manoeuvred, lobbied and connived to ensure continued lack of accountability for their industry. I.3 Nevertheless, compared to previous attempts at reining in the worst excesses of press conduct, we are much further advanced; it is therefore imperative that the framework which Parliament mandated following cross-party agreement, and which currently exists, is preserved. I.4 The PRP acts as a vital benchmark and independent assessor of whether a press self-regulator meets the Leveson criteria for independence and effectiveness: even IPSO, the body established by the press to bypass the Leveson system, still defers to those criteria as accepted standards for legitimacy and (wrongly) claims to be in substantial compliance with them. It commissioned a wholly inadequate “External Review” by Sir Joseph Pilling which claimed to analyse the extent to which IPSO had “adopted” the Leveson recommendations. The fact that IPSO felt it necessary to commission this inadequate parody of the PRP shows that there is now a generally recognised need for independent verification of the independence and effectiveness of press self-regulators. I.5 Moreover, the process of setting up a self-regulator and submitting it for recognition has now been successfully tested. The public can have confidence that those publishers which have chosen to be regulated by Impress, which was found to satisfy all the Leveson criteria, will be protected by adequate complaints handling, a fair and affordable arbitration scheme, a commitment to ensuring that the editorial code is followed, and a genuinely independent Board to oversee all operations. I.6 As long as the major publishers continue to refuse to engage with this system, and as long as there are no meaningful incentives for participation, nor
3rd floor | Unit 305 | Southbank House | Black Prince Road | London | SE1 7SJ T: 020 3735 8844 E: [email protected] W: www.hackinginquiry.org @HackingInquiry adverse consequences for non-participation, it cannot be regarded as a success; but it certainly represents the first step towards more genuine accountability of news publishers in the public interest. I.7 Given the absence of a fully functional system, the PRP should again call on the Government to implement the Leveson incentives in full; failing that, Parliament should be asked to consider further legislation as necessary, to ensure that all significant publishers are incentivised to join a recognised regulator.”
QUESTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION
1. To what extent does the new system of genuinely independent and effective system of press self-regulation recommended by Leveson exist today?
1.1 The all-embracing system of genuinely independent and effective press self-regulation recommended by Leveson does not exist today.
1.2 Leveson recommended that “a new system of regulation should not be considered sufficiently effective if it does not cover all significant news publishers” (Recommendation 23). This, in turn, required all significant news publishers to be members of a self-regulatory body which conformed to his recommendations for genuinely independent and effective self- regulation. In fact, all the significant publishers most relevant to the Leveson inquiry have refused to join or establish such a regulatory body.
2. How much confidence can the public have in the systems that are currently in place to protect it from potential harm caused by the press?
2.1 With the exception of those publications regulated by Impress, the public can have little or no confidence in the systems currently in place to protect it from harm caused by the press.
2.2 The civil and criminal law remains an inadequate system for the protection of the public. The civil law is expensive and out of the range of ordinary victims of press abuse. Furthermore, it can only provide “after the event” remedies, usually in the form of damages. The criminal law depends on decisions of the prosecuting authorities who are, in general, extremely reluctant to bring cases against the press. In both cases the law is a blunt instrument which cannot ensure compliance with a code of conduct and cannot provide guidance to those who are subject to it to ensure that harm is prevented or minimised.
2.3 Individual publishers which have established internal mechanisms for independent scrutiny – such as the Guardian and the Financial Times – may command greater confidence from their readers because they tend not to be the miscreant publications with a long history of causing harm to members of the public which the Leveson system was designed to
2
address. Nevertheless, these processes are not truly independent, and there is no reason why these publications should be exempt from a system designed to address industry practices as a whole.
2.4 IPSO has not, to date, engaged in any regulation of its members. Its complaints investigations show a consistent preference for protecting the press from adverse findings rather than protecting the public from harm. Its inadequacies are manifest and almost identical to those of the PCC analysed in the Leveson Report.
3. To what extent and in what way are social media platforms that publish news “relevant publishers” for the purposes of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 and what implications, if any, does that have for them, the PRP and/or the public?
3.1 The definition of “relevant publisher” is contained in section 41 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, with further details in Schedule 15 of the Act. This definition requires a relevant to publisher to exercise some editorial control over the material which it is published. There is a clear argument that social media sites meet the definition in section 41 and thus are subject to section 40 (when brought into force).
3.2 When bodies publish news-related material and are otherwise captured by the section 41 definition, they are capable of regulation by a recognised self-regulator if they do not fall under any of the exemptions in Schedule 15. The model can therefore be extended to social media.
3.3 We must emphasise, however, that despite declining hard copy circulation the traditional mainstream newspaper publishers retain a dominant position in online news published and are the most likely source of public harms. Thus, while the Leveson system applies to social media platforms, we believe that the press – both in hard copy and online – must remain the priority.
4. Are you aware of any facts or evidence related to the following organisations that would be useful in assessing their compliance with the Royal Charter criteria: Buzzfeed UK, Facebook, the Financial Times, Google, the Guardian, HuffPost, the Independent, IPSO, LADbible, Pink News, Private Eye, Reuters, Snapchat, Twitter, Yahoo! News?
4.1 We assume that the reference to “Royal Charter Criteria” is to the recognition criteria in Schedule 3. Most – though to our knowledge not all – of the publishers quoted have some form of complaints mechanism, with varying degrees of efficacy. It may be useful to undertake an assessment of those systems’ operational effectiveness; to our knowledge, no such exercise has been undertaken, and informal reports suggest that the complaints processes of social media platforms, in particular, offer little comfort to complainants and little protection from harm or abuse.
3
4.2 However, in respect of almost all other aspects of the Charter criteria – such as independent oversight, safeguarding of standards, affordable arbitration – there is little evidence of compliance in the listed publications or platforms. Different issues arise in relation to each of these bodies. None are subject to independent regulation and insofar as they are not based in the United Kingdom (for example, Facebook, Google, Snapchat and Twitter) they are not subject to most of the provisions of English civil and criminal law.
4.3 As to IPSO, both we and the Media Standards Trust (MST) have conducted extensive research on IPSO. IPSO and its owner publishers, the Regulatory Funding Company (RFC) have published some of the documents which set out the bodies’ regulations and processes on their websites. Their failure to meet the Royal Charter criteria is manifest.
4.4 To date, the only independent analysis is that conduct by the MST in 2013 which found that IPSO could conclusively be said to have fulfilled just 12 of the 38 criteria1. The failure to meet even half of the criteria demonstrates how deeply and profoundly inadequate the IPSO system is. Minor changes announced by IPSO over the last five years have been largely cosmetic.
4.5 This is confirmed by experience of victims of press abuse and members of the public who deal with IPSO, or otherwise suffer the consequences of an unregulated press. Our recent publication, “Thrown to the Wolves”, documents several case studies from the last 12 months of continuing press abuse, and we urge the Panel to read it.
4.6 In our view, partial compliance is no better than no compliance because the criteria operate collectively. It would be pointless for a self-regulator to satisfy 36 criteria if, for example, its Board were not appointed independently or its editorial code was not subject to Board approval. It is for precisely this reason that the PRP operates as a bulwark to protect the public from disingenuous or dishonest claims that a regulator is protecting the public interest. Further, the process of formal recognition is not in itself sufficient. While assessing a regulator as compliant is a crucial first step, a vital element of the Leveson framework was protection against industry backsliding. The public therefore requires the assurance of periodic checks to insure against reversion to the kind of industry- dominated system which historically has led to a renewed cycle of wrongdoing and abuse.
Hacked Off
8 October 2018
1 http://mediastandardstrust.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/11/MST-IPSO-Analysis-15-11-13.pdf
4
THROWN TO THE WOLVES hackinginquiry.org
I've read some of the evidence that's been put forward, and frankly some of that evidence is incredibly shocking. Some of it is really '' heartbreaking.
The test of a regulatory system is not: does that make the politicians happier? Bethany died suddenly after contracting sepsis
The test of the system is: is it going resulting from a bout of flu. Her mother, grandmother, to provide proper protection to and her teenage brother Danny were also all sick at ordinary families who, through no the time. But, in the midst of their grief and illness, fault of their own, get caught up in they were hounded by reporters. these media maelstroms and get completely mistreated ... That's the They were thrown to the wolves. test of all this. Heather Teale, Bethany's mother, "I couldn't understand why they kept It's not: do the politicians or the described the intense press harassment ringing us. I asked one reporter: "Why that she, her family, and Bethany's friends are you doing this? I'm grieving." He press feel happy with what we get? suffered in the days after her death: actually said: 11That's exactly why - we are doing this because grief sells It's: are we really protecting people "Shortly after Bethany died, the local newspapers." who have been caught up and free paper contacted the school to run a absolutely thrown to the wolves tribute. The school asked permission and "Then they came into the community. They I said yes. I realised that it's local news asked around everywhere. I received by this process. That's what the and I thought a tribute sounded lovely. But distressing messages from my as soon as it went to press, every reporter daughter's school friends who were test is. '' in the UK jumped on it. I got calls all day getting messages on Messenger until 10pm, reporters constantly ringing asking for interviews and they felt up to ask if I would give an interview - really hounded. Hounding teenagers how did it feel in intensive care with her, was something I really had an issue with how was it in the ambulance, and other - the Highlands have a high suicide rate intimate questions. They knew she had among young people. They were on to the just died and I lost a daughter. What school as well. Desperate for comments did they expect me to say? and seeking funeral dates. I was asked "At the time, my mother and my son Danny for the date of the funeral too, and that were also home. We all also had flu, like obviously made me worried. With our MSP Bethany. My mother is an older person [Member of the Scottish Parliament], and Danny is a teenager. We were all we organised for plain clothes very sick but we carried on because police officers to be present at the we had to. All the hounding and crematorium in case there was any press. You should not have to do that. David Cameron evidence to the harassment could have tipped me over the edge at any moment. Danny Not when you've Just lost a daughter." Leveson Inquiry, 14th June 2011 was absolutely devastated by It.
02 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org
Figen Murray, mother of Manchester attack victim Manchester families, Kerslake Review Martyn Hett
Week in, week out, ordinary people in But as these pages prove, nothing Britain suffer shocking cruelty dished has changed. out to them in the name of journalism. IPSO, like its predecessors, is IPSO is neither independent nor Not a few, but many. Some newspapers dominated by the big press effective. It does not regulate. Manchester families, Kerslake Review today feel as free as ever to distort, corporations that control it and wrote Despite abundant evidence of intrude and throw their weight around, its rulebook. So when there is injustice, appalling newspaper behaviour and thousands of our fellow citizens are far too often IPSO can't or won't help. it has not carried out a single their victims. And since ordinary people can't afford investigation or imposed a In these pages you will read about just to go to court, the victims of the press single fine. Nor has it demanded some of those cases. They are not are, to borrow a prime minister's words, a single front-page correction historic, but recent - though you may 'thrown to the wolves'. of real prominence or handled not have heard of them because it suits a single arbitration case. A decent society does not throw its the press to hide these things away. citizens to the wolves; it protects As in the past, victims frequently have no them. That can be done - and without Figen Murray, mother of Manchester attack victim viable means of redress and papers face threatening freedom of expression. Martyn Hett no consequences for their misdeeds. We call on Parliament to act. It They have only a sham regulator that will must stop the all-too-frequent trashing Lawyer for Mr Kebede, Grenfell resident never investigate them and never punish of people's rights and lives by the them, so they just go on dishing out the press and it must defend the public cruelty. it represents.
Of course the best of Britain's press is a force for good, campaigning in the public interest, exposing The cases Included In this booklet fall corruption and incompetence in Into four categories: high places and helping to bring Disasters - grossly intrusive conduct communities together. compounds grief and trauma But far too often, as the Leveson FatimaManji, Channel 4 newsreaderand journalist Inquiry found, it is the opposite Communities and minority groups - subjected to smears and - abusive, vindictive, invading the privacy of ordinary people, discrimination and compounding the anguish of Children - whose welfare and grieving families. privacy are disregarded
Unfortunately key recommendations Suicides - reckless reporting of the Leveson Inquiry were ignored puts vulnerable people at risk and the industry escaped meaningful #THROWNTOTHEWOLVESHeather Teale, mother of Bethany Walker These problems are not new. They reform. It just did what it has always have been known about for years. done when the public was angry: it But without independent, effective made empty promises of change and regulation the press will continue to replaced its old puppet regulator the ignore all the lessons of the past and PCC with a new one - IPSO. will continue to make people suffer.
03 04 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org
Shouldn't newspapers cover major tragic events?
It is perfectly possible for journalists to cover major events such as terrorist atrocities, natural disasters and similar events without inflicting further trauma upon the individuals affected and their families. It is possible to make approaches to affected families in a respectful and sensitive way. Sometimes families will reach out to newspapers themselves.
But it is unacceptable to repeatedly knock on the doors of the bereaved, lift content from private social media pages without These are the words of the Kerslake Kerslake Report consent, and attempt to gain entry to Report into the Manchester bombing hospitals or other places where individuals attack published In March 2018. "The Panel was shocked and dismayed by the are recovering-yet misconduct of this kind The report went on to describe was reported after last year's Manchester accounts of the families of their experiences press misconduct in further detail: attack, the Bataclan and other attacks in Paris, the Shoreham Air Disaster, and after with some of the media. They spoke of being 0 People talked about feeling people have suffered personal tragedies. 'hounded~ of a 'lack of respecC and of 'hounded' and 'bombarded'. 'sneaky' attempts to take photos when families 8 There were at least two cases of alleged impersonation by journalists. Why didn't IPSO take action after the were receiving bad news. To have experienced In one case a journalist was reported to have phoned a family claiming to Kerslake Review into the Manchester such intrusive and overbearing behaviour at a time attack highlighted so much intrusion be a bereavement nurse. In another, and abuse? of such enormous vulnerability seemed to us to someone telephoned claiming to be completely and utterly unacceptable." be from the police but the family IPSO's excuse for inaction was that they concluded it was a journalist. didn't receive any complaints. That is to be e At the hospitals, families looking for expected from a sham regulator: it was not set up or equipped to step in and protect missing loved ones and visiting the the public at times of crisis. For IPSO injured described having to force their the interests of the press come first. And Families themselves said: way through scrums of reporters who even when the Kerslake Report supplied 'wouldn't take no for an answer'. "By far the worst thing was the press." ample evidence of appalling abuses by newspapers, IPSO continued to turn a blind eye. A serious regulator would have "They ... are a disgrace, they don't take no launched investigations, but IPSO has not for an answer, they have a Jack of standards launched a single one in its four years of operation. The result of this inaction is that and ethics." misconduct is not exposed or punished, and so is bound to be repeated next time.
05 06 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org
11~11111:11eiJ3~1a3•111~iti13it®'J11:1~111 :tiH iJIg It11~ 1 [1111:11giJ:J.11:m iht1i1'j 13~ 1•: 11i11 aa 3 iJ 3,t,~ 1,11:14 [ij11~~i ij11113 ~ te;1.1 a11 it: 11~jli1 ~1,1:1~1 i,~j 11r• Rtail Online "Mr Kebede was subjected to a campaign of News The man 'whose faulty fr idge started tower Inferno' : Neighbour reveals what can only be described as harassment "Harassment how Ethiopian taxi driver raised the alarm whe n deadly blaze started In his We have fourth -floor kitchen by sections of the media. Journalists turned up pixellated by sections Mr Kebede's at his partner's home trying to doorstep him. He face, but The was bombarded with calls and texts from of the media" Sun did not. journalists offering him large amounts of money to sell his story. Even his Facebook friends were offered money to facilitate a meeting with him. When he refused to engage with the "The Daily Mail ... media or accept their money, old photos of him, taken years ago whilst he was on holiday, seemed to were downloaded from Facebook and reproduced in several tabloid newspapers scapegoat without any explanation, as if he was enjoying Mr Kebede himself in the aftermath of the fire. There was one particularly offensive article in the Daily Mail for the fire" that seemed to scapegoat Mr Kebede for the fire itself. Within 24 hours, that one article These articles about Behailu Kedebe appeared was the subject of over a thousand complaints to in the MailOnline and The Sun in the days the press watchdog from members of the public. "Serious immediately following the Grenfell Tower fire, in The calamitous events at Grenfell Tower and which 72 people lost their lives. the subsequent media intrusion have had consequences serious consequences for Mr Kebede and for Mr Kebede his family. His partner and children felt unsafe The articles: in their home and were forced to move out. The and his family ... police were so concerned about Mr Kebede's 0 Wrongly blame the fire on a person who was unlucky TH(-1.Abo<>rWh>r~nglonye- •--hdldl'QIOPO(teikll'IIKCJMOI" tef'OHl'bnlshecloll'a1tklsmt1'M1hllHM The new M, , 1n 1rchltec1ure critic, on the bolnl o1t he 07 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org 0 In the Sun on 14th August 2017 Trevor Kavanagh declared that Britain had a ~Muslim ProblemR - language directly echoing Nazi references to "the Jewish Problem" before the Holocaust. f) This was not only offensive: it incited hatred and abuse towards Muslims. €) Despite a letter from the Board of Deputies of British Jews and criticism from the Muslim Council of Britain, IPSO took no action. Kavanagh sat on the IPSO board at the time. This front-page story published on 28th August 2017 about a five-year-old Christian girl fostered with a bigoted, extremist Scientists Muslim family caused a storm of outrage Christianchild forced discover lost Orgdnisctl campaign to and was repeated in other newspapers. languages hobble anti-terror fight into Muslimfoster care Almost every detail has been authoritatively rebutted. The Times said the Muslim carer did not speak English: she did. It said she wore the niqab, covering her face; she did not. It implied that she had mocked the child's religion; her family held an Easter egg hunt for her. It said she took away the child's crucifix; she removed it for HOW ARE THEY GETTING AWAY WITH THIS? safe keeping because it was heavy and IPSO is supposed to uphold the Editors' Code - supplied valuable. to it by a committee dominated by editors and written to This was one of many stories the Times suit their interests. When it comes to prejudice and hate, wrote at the time. IPSO refused to accept this code only applies to individuals, which means that no 0 This Sunday Telegraph article from 31st January 2016 branded any complaints from the public about the denigration of a group - women, Muslims, Travellers, trans Haras Ahmed an "extremist", simply because he was critical lies, but was eventually required to accept people or any other - can ever count as discrimination or of the government's anti-terror strategy - as many politicians, a complaint about another front-page abuse at IPSO. Complaints by or on behalf of groups are academics and ordinary members of the public are. article from Tower Hamlets council. The routinely dismissed. Which helps to explain how In 2017 adjudication was buried on page 6. E) Prevent Watch, a campaign which was traduced in the IPSO received 8,148 complaints of discrimination article, brought a complaint to IPSO, who dismissed it. But and upheld just one. A decent discrimination clause is Who is harmed by such reckless, warped when Mr Ahmed took legal action against The Telegraph, the perfectly possible - the Leveson-style regulator IMPRESS journalism? Every Muslim. What can they newspaper admitted fault and settled. has one - but IPSO's press bosses have chosen otherwise. do about it? Nothing. Ordinary Muslims They have given themselves a licence to abuse minorities, smeared in this way have no remedy. €) This was a humiliating result for IPSO, who saw their and they are using that licence to the full. vindication of the newspaper overturned after Mr Ahmed initiated legal proceedings. 09 10 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. "ITIS I "It was upsetting enough to Whydid C4 have a find myself the latest victim presenterin a hijab to Kelvin MacKenzie's tirade. to frontcoverage of But now to know that has Muslimterrorattack? been given the green light by the press regulator and that ~? ----· effectively it is open season ~Li on minorities, and Muslims in particular, is frightening." On 28th July 2018 the Daily Mail published a two-page spread asserting that the Paris suburb of Saint Denis was a 'powder keg' That was the response of Channel 4 News presenter Fatima Manji crowded with 300,000 illegal immigrants. Its reporter Andrew to IPSO's rejection of her complaint in July 2016 about a Sun Malone gave what was described as a first-hand account of 'the article expressing outrage that she, a Muslim wearing a headscarf, tensions in a community at odds with mainstream society'. had been allowed to present the programme on the night of the Eight days later MailOnline took the article down 'for Nice massacre , carried out by a Muslim. investigations' after it had been publicly fact-checked on Twitter 0 Former Sun editor MacKenzie wrote in his column: 'Her name I'd use gunsh1 by a French citizen, Marwan Muhammad. He detailed 15 is Fatima Manji ... Was it appropriate for her to be on camera to stop migra mistakes, including: when there had been yet another shocking slaughter by a Muslim?", adding "Who was in the studio representing our 0 The Mail claimed the figure of 300,000 illegal immigrants in fears?" f/ Saint Denis came from a report from France's parliament. ~ In the eyes of IPSO, somehow the article did not contain 'a ·•-="¥"•~li ,, E) Muhammad quoted the relevant report saying: 'The only thing prejudicial or pejorative reference to the complainant [Manji] 0 we are sure about is that the State doesn't know how many on the grounds of her religion'. illegal immigrants there are.' ISN'T IT RIGHT THAT RACE AND RELIGION IS DISCUSSED IN NEWSPAPERS? E) For Manji herself it wasn't over with the IPSO ruling. She was Muhammad quoted official data showing that the total E) promptly accused in the Sun of 'making a fool of herself' by population of Saint Denis was 110,733. He asked: 'Please There is a clear distinction between criticising beliefs, Trevor Kavanagh - himself a member of IPSO's board. explain to us .. how could 300,000 of these 110,733 human which journalists must be free to do, and coverage which is beings be illegal immigrants?' pejorative, discriminatory and incites hatred - whether that is based on race, religion or any other characteristic. The Again, IPSO refuses to see discrimination. Again, all Muslims lose. 0 In April 2015 an article in the Sun (above) said migrants €) The Mail quoted a local allegedly saying: 'Now they won't Leveson-standard press regulator IMPRESS, which mainly were like cockroaches. let Christmas happen.' Muhammed showed photographs regulates local news publishers, allows groups to complain of the busy Christmas market at Saint Denis, right in front of E) Since no individual was named, IPSO did nothing. where coverage incites hatred, proving that regulation of the city hall. this kind of material can be done in a way which protects €) In response to criticism, IPSO said that under the terms of freedom of expression. the code: ~Migrants as such are not a group that can be discriminated against." Nothing has changed. 11 12 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org THELEVESONSYSTEM: 11i;,a1~11lifii;£1;\ll~• II~11)3~ 3~11)3~ili31=;Jitll)l!ii[I]~I GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT Hands initial funding to the Press Recognition Panel. The Government Oversight of regulation rests with politicians, who may be either seeking to ingratiate is then banned from further involvement. themselves with or intimidate news publishers, and who decide at their own discretion (and without specified criteria) what is good enough for the public. Absolute independence from Government: a Leveson red-line. 0 Senior Ministers continue to meet with press editors & executives on an un-minuted basis. PRESS RECOGNITION PANEL REGULATORY FUNDING COMPANY Independently appointed and reviews the conduct of self-regulators (set up by the press) every three years, according to Leveson's criteria Committee of executives mainly from the big newspaper groups which meets in secret. for independence and effectiveness. Manages IPSO's funding allocation and has a veto over any rule changes. Industry influence hangs over funding & rules. INDEPENDENT SELF-REGULATOR • Applies for recognition from the Press Recognition Panel. When recognised IPSO sets its own rules, writes the standards code, and conducts investigations. No real power over the code or its own rules, never conducted an investigation, never Independence of Board members and of operation is guaranteed. imposed a fine and never required a national paper to print a front-page correction. Not independent of the industry. ARBITRATION SERVICE • ARBITRATION SERVICE Free for the public, cheap for the newspapers, fair for both sides • and compulsory for all members. Biased, because it is managed by the newspapers, and signing up is optional for all newspapers. Most have not. INVESTIGATIONS INVESTIGATIONS Can conduct investigations whenever there are serious or systemic • breaches of the code. Threshold for establishing an investigation is irrationally high; requiring misconduct to be not only serious, but repeated on a systemic basis. IPSO has never launched one. CODE CODE Standards code agreed by the regulator, advised by a committee with the involvement of working journalists. Written by a committee of newspaper editors and executives. IPSO has no power to change • • or amend it without the editors and executives. • 13 14 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org I Anunholy affair Pfi'IU fr-"!!'1'.'"'." Avlc.vhastmn~etrayvdaltwle.,milglhat • the~5litlJtemanhe~llowedtomc,w-inlo AS"SLAUGHTERED"WHEN- SHE WAS hi1ttomes!ept'llllhhiswIwor"9years 1~( 1WJ:1i;JI~t1 1 ;1 i:111 iMR ~ In this Daily Star front page from 24th May including her friends and family, that she Although the picture was published on 2017, following the Manchester bomb was missing or deceased. Though this the front page, IPSO let the Daily Star off attack, an image taken from Twitter was went on the front page, and though it was the hook with an adjudication buried on published as the picture of a missing girl. information of huge emotional impact for page 4, after a tiny correction on page 2. There had been no contact with the family those involved, no one at the paper seems IPSO has an appalling record when it of the girl, who was only 13 years old at to have checked. comes to protecting children's welfare. the time. The girl's mother said the experience had Lacking the powers to deter such The girl in the picture was not missing - been "traumatic" and had "intruded coverage and the willingness to remedy she wasn't even at the concert. Yet under into her daughter's private and it, IPSO's inaction has allowed children the heading "Slaughter of the innocents" family life". to be treated as fair game for stories in a national newspaper informed the world, newspapers time and again. i;li8:◄ 1i$i'1~M~11i 1 i Lfii:1te:1111);J3~11)t1 1:(1)~1131!B iitl1 1l:(1)1(B L1ililUiil3;t 0 In reporting on a salacious story about a homeless alcoholic man's affair with a married woman on 28th September 2016, the man's children were needlessly named. E) The children's mother, who complained, said the article "had a profound effect on the daily lives" of her children, and "caused them great distress". E) IPSO rejected the complaint. None of these children's faces were pixellated when they appeared in the newspaper. 15 16 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org WHY DOESN'T IPSO AT LEAST REQUIRE AN APOLOGY OR CORRECTION? Iiji):)I(8hi311I~lij;Mw:I[~I]jij,11 Despite Leveson's recommendation, IPSO lacks the power to order a Where the wellbeing of children is concerned you might think the press would show newspaper to apologise when it has In reporting on a case of child abuse a young boy was named and his severe injuries, special care. And where they get things wrong you might think there would be serious acted in breach of the Code. IPSO does which will affect him for the rest of his life, were described in graphic detail. The lifelong consequences. That's not what happens, and so the papers never learn. have the power to require publication disabilities which were caused by these injuries were also listed. Though he was just a of an adjudication after it has upheld a child, and though he was the victim of appalling abuse, there was no protection for the complaint. But it never uses this power boy's privacy and his medical conditions were paraded before the world. to any meaningful effect. Instead of The boy's grandmother complained to IPSO about the invasive coverage, which requiring a front page adjudication to The boy's face 1 is certain to stay with the boy as he grows up. be published when the code-breaching was not pixellated I~m~113~11L1 1w (ij ii);J3111 i )jllIii article has appeared on the front page, IPSO rejected her complaint on all grounds. in The Sun. 1 IPSO typically orders a short and usually 11~LJ~MIi(1)~m~I 4'ibig!,w3 jl cryptic message in far smaller type to appear in the corner of the page. The 0 This story, from July 2014, clearly identified a young boy before code breach, regardless of its severity he was old enough to consent to use of his image; in particular and the distress and damage caused without clothes on and exposing a mark on his chest. to the child, is never properly remedied. f) Unlike in this screenshot, the boy's picture was unpixellated in And the abuse continues. The Sun's original front page. He and his family, including his young siblings, were named. E) IPSO's response? It considered the matter resolved when a note on page 2 some weeks later implied some regret, WHY DOESN'T IPSO INVESTIGATE while shamelessly celebrating The Sun's "record of standing THIS KIND OF COVERAGE? up for children". The Sun made no apology for publishing the story, or using the child's name or image. Leveson said that regulators should have the power to investigate newspapers where there are serious or systemic breaches of the standards code. When newspaper executives drew up the plans for IPSO's rules, this was one of the 'Pi~~ ol"Preston clrikln!n on p:tcd1,phii~-;-ID'iile 11~1fit6*11)18: 1111);J3 ~•Ifi311 many Leveson proposals they rejected. Instead, to prompt an investigation ,i1l;titt1m•6;M11a(ffi11(1l~• under IPSO, breaches must be .b.m.h filit;f~:r~~il1~r~li:i~- serious and systemic. This higher bar 1 1 means in practice that investigations are 1;J3w;H)llH8311~U!4'ibii1w3;1 far less likely. 0 In a story from January 2015 about Facebook images of local In four years, IPSO has not launched children being shared online for sexual gratification, the images a single investigation into any code were reproduced in the local newspaper, the Lancashire breach or misconduct, despite repeated Evening Post. intrusions into children's lives. There are countless other cases of children being f) The images were pixellated, but the children could still be recklessly named or otherwise identified identified from them. in similar stories. IPSO does nothing and E) In this case IPSO actually upheld the complaint, but to little so the practice goes on. effect. Whlle the Images had appeared on the front page, the adjudication was buried on page 9. 17 18 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org \-Vo1mmbctnneclfrom Rut.oxby husbaml took he.-own life- Suicideof THEYNEVERLEARN artistwho thought The suicide of actor Robin Williams in 2014 prompted a frenzy of press speculation about the cause and method of his death - even though specialist mental health and suicide she was prevention organisations had been warning for years that this kind of coverage was known to too ugly encourage others to take their own lives. Despite these terrible risks, the reckless coverage Husbandhadstopped herfromgettingBotox wasn't punished by the regulator of the time; it wasn't even criticised. (;~<~ 4:1!·~~~~".. :",' 0' t::;;;;~;:,-.-.:,,""·: ··:-~··•:·~.,.~~ Scott'sdoomedJJO!ar b:ill:-: ::: ~ byhlS~.. - .' .. •1;l,,Jm•~ia1E11a;,:ia;,1lt,1:• 11 • II .... 4 Dr"'-i'i" These articles were published on October 5th 2017, after a woman suffering from mental illness took her own life in July WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRESS REPORTING ON 2016 after suffering from mental illness. THE SUICIDES OF WELL-KNOWN PEOPLE? In particular, she suffered from facial dysmorphia, and on one No one objects to the press reporting the facts of a suicide. occasion stated her intention of buying cosmetic treatments. Her Mental health organisations, however, have repeatedly husband responded by taking her credit card. Later that day, she called on newspapers not to go into detail about the took her own life. methods used, because doing so can trigger "copycat CAN IPSO ACT WHEN SUICIDE REPORTING, SUCH suicides". AS IN THESE EXAMPLES, BRAZENLY BREACHES 0 The Botox element was barely relevant to the story yet almost THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF MENTAL HEALTH Similarly, mental health charities have warned that all the coverage led on this element. ADVOCACY GROUPS? speculation over the reasons for an individual's suicide should be avoided. 8 Mental health charities have repeatedly called for speculation IPSO can act - the Editors' Code has a provision saying over motive and method of suicide not to be published. Many 'care should be taken to avoid excessive detail of the The Editors' Code also requires publication to be of these stories ignored those warnings, despite the clearly method used' - but what little has been done has made handled "sensitively". stated risks of ~copycat" suicides. barely any impact. Well over a decade after specialist When even a weak code is not enforced, newspapers organisations began pointing out the risk, reckless E) One online article was removed - but other articles remain know they have a free hand. reporting is still going on. published. There has been no correction and no apology. 19 20 THROWN TO THE WOLVES How the public suffers from the absence of press regulation. hackinginquiry.org 11~11)i~ i~11) i~i•ii i iQ imi 0 A code of practice that reflects the needs of the public as well as those of decent journalism. These case studies show that much of the press is at least as cruel f) An unbiased body that judges difficult cases fairly and on and unethical today as it ever was. There are many others that we their real merits, investigates properly when things go badly could have included. Week in, week out, innocent people continue wrong, and can impose sanctions severe enough to ensure to suffer just as they did before the Leveson Inquiry. that lessons are learned. Nothing has changed. E) Guaranteed insulation from any political influence to ensure Editors have no excuse: they know exactly what they are doing. that journalism remains entirely free from government And as a consequence our fellow citizens are STILL being interference. thrown to the wolves. Some claim that journalism is a blunt instrument, and that this That is what Leveson recommended and what Parliament approved is the price we must pay for a free press. We disagree. in 2013, until this Government caved in to press demands and That is not what happens in a civilised society. Our broadcast abandoned its full implementation. journalists are the most trusted in the country, and feel no need to The kind of harm presented here is avoidable without hindering sacrifice their fellow citizens in this way. important journalism which informs the public and holds power There is a simple solution, agreed by Parliament and supported to account. by the vast majority of the public: implement Sir Brian Leveson's It is time for politicians to stand up for the public interest, and to moderate recommendations immediately and in full. send a message that editors and proprietors cannot trample on the We call on the government to do just that. feelings of ordinary citizens. It's time to implement Leveson. Jj,._ THIS REPORT SHOWS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN NEWSPAPERS ARE LEFT UNREGULATED ~ Ethical standards become a wild west, in which: The welfare of children is wilfully disregarded when The reckless and ignorant reporting of suicides puts editors see the chance of a lurid headline. other vulnerable lives at risk. Minority communities, and especially Britain's 2.8 The body that claims to regulate the press, IPSO, million Muslims, routinely face discriminatory and is both unwilling and unable to act. often dishonest reporting. When disasters occur, victims who need help and support are subjected to additional trauma by aggressive, intrusive reporters.