05.06.2013 Views

Privacy and Injunctions - Evidence - Parliament

Privacy and Injunctions - Evidence - Parliament

Privacy and Injunctions - Evidence - Parliament

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Richard Caseby, Group Managing Editor, News Group Newspapers, Dominic Mohan, editor,<br />

The Sun, <strong>and</strong> Justin Walford, Editorial Legal Counsel, News Group Newspapers—Oral<br />

evidence (QQ 1511–1593)<br />

situation where one newspaper decided to say, “If you look at Twitter you will find it”, so<br />

lots of people looked at Twitter to find it. It was a situation where lots of people on Twitter<br />

were discussing it <strong>and</strong> had found it. Fleet Street as a whole, including The Sun, reported that.<br />

Dominic Mohan: As did TV.<br />

Justin Walford: Yes. It was on television as well.<br />

Richard Caseby: Perhaps MPs should not offer tabloid newspapers temptation.<br />

Q1581 Lord Thomas of Gresford: I am sorry, could you please repeat that?<br />

Richard Caseby: Well, we have had names mentioned in the House of Commons of<br />

people who have been subject to injunctions. We have had injunctions breached by<br />

members of the House of Commons, have we not?<br />

not.<br />

Q1582 Lord Thomas of Gresford: We do not approve of that, or at least I do<br />

Richard Caseby: I am just saying that it is an obvious temptation to report what<br />

happens in the House of Commons.<br />

Q1583 Lord Thomas of Gresford: I have referred to something that is circular,<br />

but it is quite possible that a newspaper reporter or even an editor could encourage<br />

someone to put the name up on Twitter in the first place.<br />

Richard Caseby: There is no evidence that that has ever happened at The Sun.<br />

Q1584 Lord Thomas of Gresford: I am not saying that there is evidence, but it is<br />

a temptation, isn’t it? Then you say to your readers, “Gosh, there is something on Twitter<br />

you should look at.” They look at Twitter, <strong>and</strong> you go to court <strong>and</strong> say, “Look, everybody<br />

knows. Why can we not discharge your injunction?”<br />

Richard Caseby: It is hypothetical. That could happen.<br />

Justin Walford: I see what you are saying, <strong>and</strong>, purely personally, what you are saying<br />

is totally logical <strong>and</strong> makes sense. I do not believe it has actually happened, but of course<br />

there is a temptation there <strong>and</strong> it could happen. You are quite right. I think we have got to<br />

agree that of course there is a temptation there. I do not believe that in this instance that is<br />

what happened but, yes, you have identified a potential problem.<br />

Q1585 Chair: Is there anything specific that you think should be done to encourage<br />

this underst<strong>and</strong>able level playing field, which is really what you are arguing for, between the<br />

print <strong>and</strong> the online media?<br />

791

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!