A better code. Now make it work

Andrew Marr regulating the press

Share
Related Topics
After the death of Diana, people's natural curiosity and their acquired social sense of decency collided. The press, caught in the moral dilemma, has had to respond.

For decades the editors and proprietors of tabloid newspapers - in particular - have been expected to purvey gossip to readers who abhor gossips; to reveal private behaviour nicely; to dig the dirt while keeping their fingernails and their buyers' consciences meticulously clean.

Now this very British compact has been destroyed. The press must finally choose: it can offer the people the promise and fact of better journalistic behaviour, or the stories they most love to read - but not both. To choose wrongly would be to court that most feared retribution, a privacy law.

British journalism has been drinking in David Mellor's ``last chance saloon'' for so many years now that one might have expected it to be far too power-drunk to give a coherent answer. And yet it has: after the Press Complaints Commission's suggested reforms to its code, unveiled yesterday, it has chosen righteousness.

We may hang our heads, perhaps, that it has been necessary to swear ourselves a new code which is mostly mere human decency writ official. Assuming that editors and proprietors agree (I think they all will), then we abjure the habits of grabbing pictures of people in churches, of pursuing children (or buying dirty stories from them), of using pictures obtained by harassment, and of showing little restraint when interviewing or photographing people in paroxysms of grief.

And we needed a new rulebook to agree that? It says something about the pressures of the media market that it has been necessary to draft this Geneva Convention of the circulation war in the first place.

There are two points readers need to know. First, that the proposed new code really is tougher. By that I mean that some of the stories hypocritical readers most want to enjoy, the ``real dirt'' on the famous and glamorous, will no longer appear. A public appetite for juicy gossip will be starved. Some papers may sell fewer copies as a result. Lord Wakeham, chairman of the PCC, and his colleagues, have taken fairly drastic action.

The second is that the idea of financial sanctions to back up the tougher code has been dropped - strangely, to my mind. Lord Wakeham thought it would require so many months of extra haggling in the industry that it wasn't worth doing. But I suspect that the code will be held to anyway. Why? Because the industry is so terrified of full-blown privacy legislation that proprietors will not applaud editors who raise sales by breaking the agreement. They will sack them instead.

So all is tickety-boo? Not quite. We are pro-privacy in the sense that prurience and voyeurism should take a few steps back in newspapers. The harassment and ``doorstepping'' of people in distress has been sad at times, disgusting at other times. But there are enough dangerous grey areas in the proposed new code for any freedom-conscious journalist or reader to wince.

Last week, we at The Independent heard a rumour that John Major and Chris Patten were discussing the future of the Tory party while closeted at Tristan Garel-Jones's villa in Spain. We phoned them and we got pictures from a local restaurant of the trio, along with their assorted spouses.

We published the lot. The politicians say it was a holiday, innocent of plotting. We remain unconvinced. Should readers of The Independent know about that little episode, or not? I think you should. But it is possible that Lord Wakeham may disagree - though he tells me he would probably consider the story legitimate, and therefore the photographs too, if they were taken with permission.

But what if we had snatched them? The proposed new PCC code would ban photographs taken without permission in restaurants - and I suppose a Spanish bar counts as a restaurant - unless there is an ``overriding public interest''. Hmm. Public interest, fine. But who defines ``overriding''? In the case just given, our story was politically interesting. But it was a straw-in-the-wind story, not a blow-your-House-down story. So who decides?

Here are some credible examples of the kinds of problem the PCC will soon have to wrestle with. The revised code implies that places where people can reasonably expect privacy should be extended to include, for instance, beaches, gyms, even moorland. Well, I think politicians and princesses have the right to sweat and grunt in a gym without having a telephoto lens trained on their heaving selves.

But what about a chat show host who strips to his boxer shorts one cold December day on Brighton beach, before dancing along the pebbles roaring ``Waltzing Matilda''? He cannot reasonably claim to be acting in private. And what of a disgraced politician who, as a scandal breaks, walks with his wife for 10 miles across a hillside for a picnic - only to find a photographer and reporter waiting for them on a dry-stone wall. Should they be treated as being in public or private? Are they being harassed? Is the public interest proportionate to the harassment?

These decisions will be made in the first instance by editors. But they will be second-guessed by the PCC. My only concern is that we end up with a situation where a clubby private committee, with lots of powerful chums in high places in both politics and journalism, is able to deem which political stories are of ``overriding'' importance and which are embarrassing, second-order stories, to be kept away from public sight.

We would then have a charter for establishment cover-ups. Politicians, wishing to have an easier time, would collude with powerful proprietors, who wish to keep away a privacy law, and ensure that life became more comfortable for the powerful. Whereas the people who most need protection are the less powerful people who are caught up from time to time in voyeuristic frenzies.

If the PCC started to slide in that direction, then I for one would prefer a new statutory deal, including a Law of Privacy - which is coming, anyway, via incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights - plus a reform of our excessive libel laws and the long-promised Freedom of Information Act. We'd take our chances in open court.

Probably, everything will be fine. The PCC may let the embarrassing political stories keep coming, shrugging off hissed complaints from Cabinet ministers and clubland murmurings from the great ones of the country. Probably, this is a good day for British public life. If so, hooray. But there are a few phrases and grey areas here that make me just a little uneasy. Paranoia? Yet again - probably. But if there is one thing that matters more in journalism than a love of wide-eyed gossip, it is slit-eyed suspicion.

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Pharmaceutical Computer System Validation Specialist

£300 - £350 Per Day: Clearwater People Solutions Ltd: Pharmaceutical Computer ...

Senior Java Developer - API's / Webservices - XML, XSLT

£400 - £450 Per Day: Clearwater People Solutions Ltd: Our client is currently ...

Newly Qualified Teachers

£90 - £115 per day: Randstad Education Birmingham: We are currently looking fo...

Year 3/4 Teacher

£120 - £140 per day: Randstad Education Birmingham: Job Share Year 3/4 Teacher...

Day In a Page

Read Next
 

The racist abuse of Mario Balotelli on Twitter is disgusting, but it can be stopped

Anna Jonsson
A survey by Which? found that some of the UK’s biggest airports, including Heathrow, left travellers the most agitated  

Third-runway momentum is gathering. We need to stop it in its tracks

Mary Dejevsky
A roller-coaster tale from the 'voice of a generation'

Not That Kind of Girl:

A roller-coaster tale from 'voice of a generation' Lena Dunham
London is not bedlam or a cradle of vice. In fact it, as much as anywhere, deserves independence

London is not bedlam or a cradle of vice

In fact it, as much as anywhere, deserves independence
Vivienne Westwood 'didn’t want' relationship with Malcolm McLaren

Vivienne Westwood 'didn’t want' relationship with McLaren

Designer 'felt pressured' into going out with Sex Pistols manager
Jourdan Dunn: Model mother

Model mother

Jordan Dunn became one of the best-paid models in the world
Apple still coolest brand – despite U2 PR disaster

Apple still the coolest brand

Despite PR disaster of free U2 album
Scottish referendum: The Yes vote was the love that dared speak its name, but it was not to be

Despite the result, this is the end of the status quo

Boyd Tonkin on the fall-out from the Scottish referendum
Manolo Blahnik: The high priest of heels talks flats, Englishness, and why he loves Mary Beard

Manolo Blahnik: Flats, Englishness, and Mary Beard

The shoe designer who has been dubbed 'the patron saint of the stiletto'
The Beatles biographer reveals exclusive original manuscripts of some of the best pop songs ever written

Scrambled eggs and LSD

Behind The Beatles' lyrics - thanks to Hunter Davis's original manuscript copies
'Normcore' fashion: Blending in is the new standing out in latest catwalk non-trend

'Normcore': Blending in is the new standing out

Just when fashion was in grave danger of running out of trends, it only went and invented the non-trend. Rebecca Gonsalves investigates
Dance’s new leading ladies fight back: How female vocalists are now writing their own hits

New leading ladies of dance fight back

How female vocalists are now writing their own hits
Mystery of the Ground Zero wedding photo

A shot in the dark

Mystery of the wedding photo from Ground Zero
His life, the universe and everything

His life, the universe and everything

New biography sheds light on comic genius of Douglas Adams
Save us from small screen superheroes

Save us from small screen superheroes

Shows like Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D are little more than marketing tools
Reach for the skies

Reach for the skies

From pools to football pitches, rooftop living is looking up
These are the 12 best hotel spas in the UK

12 best hotel spas in the UK

Some hotels go all out on facilities; others stand out for the sheer quality of treatments