The Edi ' - The Leveson Inquiry

For Distribution to CPs
terms -- the Code is not designed to protect commercial deals Tory Boris Johnson on the danger of lying about an alleged affair
Privacy dees not mean invisibility -- pctures taken n with Petronella Wyatt, the same newspaper ran a bigger story
genuinely public places and information already in the public headed Top ToryWho Ouizzed Boris Over Pefey Affair Cheated On
domain can be legitimate.
His Own Wife With Chief Of Staff To Duncan Smith. Mr Maclean
0 Pr,~ac y ma Y be a ga nat the pub c interest -such
as when camp a ned to the PCC that two small diary items published two
used to keeoseoret conduct that m[ g htreflectona ublicfi P g ure years before had not placed the matter nto t~e public domain
or role model. The PCC has ruled in several cases where beaDle sufficiently to justify publication of the story
have effectively invaded their own privacy by selling their story, or
Sounding a warning to both editors and potential complainants
talking publicly about private matters -- or not complaining when the Commission said that, even though the diary items were small
someone else does.
the information was undeniably in the public domafn fMacf~n MP v
The Commission’s view ~s that those people should expect Marl ~>,*~ Sunday. Repo~ 72: 2UJ’5): =it is important for editors f~o be
consequentia reed a comment, but that it should be proportionate,
aware that the Code applies as much to material contained m d~ary
pieces as to the rest of a newspaper," said the Commission,
C-~ ~ ¢~I~ ~ t~:~ ~ ~-~’~’
"it is also important for people who are the subject of such pieces
The parents of a sate survivin~ Conjoined twin sold picture rights to
to realiea that not to complain about them may limit their ability to
the story, but complained that ~t was intrusive and damaging to the
child’s welfare when another paper published unauthorised
complain about future erhcles whlch repeat the same thing
photographs of the baby The Commission disagreed. First, a ~U~L~C; ~:~@ ~S
photograph of the infant’s face did not concern her welfare, and, The PCC accepts that people such as show business celebrities or
second, the parents had put the material into the public domain, sports stars may need to create a professional image ef themselves
Privacy, said the PCC, was "not a commodity which can be sold on in the media. This does not undermine their right as individuals to
one 3erson-s terms". ~t~rd ~ Manchester S,~t~nf ~ h~s÷~*x~, f~,%5,of, ~ privacy or mean the press could justify publishing articles on any
~. 200#
subject about them. Their "private and tamify Iife, home, health and
The pnn~pta here is that 3eople must, in part at least, nave cue correspondence" all falt within the Code. unless there ~s a public
regard for protecting their own privacy. Under the Cede. ~formation
cannot be private if it is already genuinely in the pubticdomam, and
interest in bublicatlon
people cannot complain if tney themselves have put it there.
Address cede: Publishing details about a calebdfy’s home without
Similarly, their scope for complaint is also limited if they nave consent, for example, could Constitute a breach, especially because
failed to complain about a previous allegation to prevent repetition. of security problems and the threat from stalkers. The key test ]n
SUCh cases is not whether the precise location nas been disclosed,
Nailing rumeurs:/n 2002 Mr David Maclean MR the Conservative but whether the information published would be sufficient to enable
Chief Whip, d~d not challenge a Sunday qewspaper’s diary ~tems people to find the whereabouts of the home.
suggesting he had had an affair with a senior civil servant In the
A comataint from singer Ms Dynamite was upheld after a local
1990s. But wnen ~n 2004, Mr Maclean had occasion to warn fellow paper revealed that she had moved into a property near her mother,
picturing the home and naming the street. ~vm L ~’nam#~. ~ ~4z ~cJ
But the PCC Judges eacn case individually, according to the threat
posed. So wnen the author J. K. Rowling, wno guards her privacy
close~y, complalne~ about d~sc~osure of details of her homes in
London and Scotland, she had mixed success
The PCC upheld ner complaint that a Daily Mirror article, pictunng
the London house and naming the road In which it was located was
sufficient to identify it. However, details the paper had given of two
of the author’s Scottish 3ropertles were not judged intrusive. In one
her Edinburgn house was pictured, but only the name of the suburb
was g~ven. In the other, an aeria~ 3hotograph of Ms Rowting’s country
name ts name and the county Perthshire m wnlcn it was
located were not regarded as a giveaway that might attract unwanted
visitors, fh~o¢~.~ins J/:.;~! ~ir~ot: h~aoo!-/72 2005
In 2008, Ms Rowling comblained that three more newspaper
stones had Identified her country name by saying it was c~ose to a
farm she nap bought, running more pictures and naming e neerey
town. But the PCC ruled that the information g~ven was not
suffic4ently different to that already in the public domain, especially
on the internet -- including a listing in Wikipedia --to contravene
the Code. Significantly, the articles did not g}ve the precise
wnen the house would be unoccupied that would expose her
home to greater risk than for ether similar properties. ~Z~i~7~o,~:~-~ v
Pregnant pause: As with homes, so with health. There are limits on
what can be said about celebrities, even though they are constantly
in the public eye. Pregnancy even for non-public figures, can rere~y
be kept secret for long, 3ut the PCC has ruled that early speculation
on whether someone is expecting a baby can be intrusive.
The actress Joanna Riding complained that a d~ary item disclosed
that sne had withdrawn from e theatre role because she was
expecting e baby -- before she had even told her tamily. She
subsequently suffered a miscarriage
n a landmark adjudication protecting all mothers-to-be, whether
public figures or not, the PCC said that revealing the pregnancy at
such an early stage was a serious intrusion ~-~/,’.’~ 7h~
mo~::~bsn~!~ ~ ~erJ.’~r 7;~; 200~ And, setting out guidelines for the
future, the Commission ruled
The press should not reveal news of an individual’s pregnancy
without consent before the 12-week scan unless the information
is known to such an extent ~hat it would be perverse not to refer
toil.
whereabouts of the house, or name the road nor where the 9roperty * This is because of the risk of camp#cations or miscarriages, end
was }n relation to the nearby town, and the photographs showing the because it should be down to the mother to share ~he news with
surrounding countryside did not pinpoint the location. ~’~.o~ p. v Th~ herfem#y and friends at an early stage.
Ms~i on Sunday S:;o, tis~ Edff.~c Da#y m[r~a~ ~.Jai v Re ;~/~c;: F?epot7 The PCC has made clear that it will not accept attain pts by
~" 2008 journalists to get around its guidelines by running speculative stories.
The Code’s protection for people genuinely at risk from stalkers or It upheld a complaint against a national tabloid which, having
obsessive fans does not automatically carry aver to non-celebrities, received firm information that the singer Charlotte Church was not
Ms Helen Edmonds, former wife of Noel Edmonds, complained that more than 12 weeks pregnant, published a piece headlined Baby
a Sunday paper story headlined A Far Cry From Crinkley Bottom Rumoure For Sober Church. The Commission said that trying to
identified the location of her new home, making her and her children circumvent privacy provisions by presenting the story as speculation
vulnerable to criminals. But the PCC ruled that the piece did not was against the spirit of the Code. fChurch ~ "Ebe Sun: Rasor~ 75
contain information --- such as security arrangements or the times 2007~.
MAD100036633
58