Use existing laws to avoid regulations that will hamper press freedom

The freedom of the press is in danger. But this freedom is not at the moment absolute. There are limits on what the press can publish. These include personal medical details, which are protected by law and by professional ethics of medical confidentiality. There could conceivably be occasions when it might be judged to be in the public interest to breach this, as indeed, medical law itself allows that in serious public interest, the medical records of an individual can be revealed. But there is no plausible reason to think that it was in the general public interest to know that the Duchess of Cambridge had or had not been retching, and therefore no plausible defence on the grounds of press freedom. Given that the programme on 2D FM which conducted this hoax phone call was clearly an entertainment, not a news programme, this reinforces the illegitimate nature of what they did. Kate Middleton deserves  no more protection than any other pregnant woman, but neither does she deserve less.

It also appears to be the case that the broadcast violated standards in Australian broadcasting whereby those recorded secretly have to give their permission before broadcast. In the case of something which is clearly a prank done not for any reason other than entertainment, this seems perfectly fair, although for serious journalism, for example working under cover to expose crime or other matters of public interest, it would seem to be a hamper to some very worthy investigations. (Indeed, one of the problems we are faced with is too broad an idea of what counts as journalism – photoshopped ‘up the skirt’ shots of  minor celebrities are not actually news stories.)

All the more reason then, to pursue existing legal avenues against those who use trickery to obtain access to private records for nothing other than fun. Because by using what existing law there is, we can best avoid the perception that we need more regulation of the press. There are already laws in place that give some protection to individuals, whilst allowing the press to operate.  So that a genuine journalist who has a genuine reason to use subterfuge to get access to information, for example by hiding the fact that they are a journalist, can continue to do so. The freedom of the press is utterly vital in a democracy. It is already compromised by issues of ownership of the press. It would be a very worrying development if the freedom to investigate and report news were to be compromised by the wish to constrain those who break existing laws in the name of entertainment, whilst sheltering illegitimately under the umbrella of journalism.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.