1 INTRODUCTION
1. From time to time an event occurs which causes
the public and politicians to question the integrity of the methods
used by reporters and photographers to gather material for publication
by the press. In January 2007, two such events occurred, casting
a shadow over print journalism. The first, in early January 2007,
was the persistent harassment by photographers of Kate Middleton,
the then girlfriend of HRH Prince William, amidst speculation
that an engagement was about to be announced. The second, later
that month, was the sentencing of Mr Clive Goodman, a reporter
employed by the News of the World, following his conviction
for conspiracy to intercept communications without lawful authority.
These two events were preceded by a third, which attracted much
less public attention even though its implications were potentially
even more significant. This was the release by the Information
Commissioner, in December 2006, of a list of publications employing
journalists who had had dealings with a particular private investigator
known to have had obtained personal data by illegal means.
2. The conjunction of these events was certainly
co-incidental, but they have given rise to renewed doubts about
whether the press is overstepping the mark in the methods which
are used to obtain information. The resurfacing of those doubts
provoked this inquiry.
3. The timetable was a brisk one: we announced terms
of reference on 6 February 2007. They were:
- Whether self-regulation by the press continues
to offer sufficient protection against unwarranted invasions of
privacy;
- If the public and Parliament are to continue
to rely upon self-regulation, whether the Press Complaints Commission
Code of Practice needs to be amended;
- Whether existing law on unauthorised disclosure
of personal information should be strengthened; and
- What form of regulation, if any, should apply
to online news provision by newspapers and others.
We held a single morning of oral evidence on 6 March:
a list of witnesses appears on page 38.
4. This inquiry set out to draw lessons from particular
events and has, in general, confined itself to harassment and
the use of sharp (but sometimes justified) practices in newsgathering.
We have not attempted to hold an inquiry on the scale of that
held by our predecessor Committee in 2002 and 2003, which was
based on submissions from across the national and regional press
and on written and oral evidence from people who claimed to have
suffered injustices at the hands of the press. This Report is
not a broad look at whether the system of self-regulation as currently
operated by the industry is the best way to curb unjustified practices
and punish those who publish material obtained in such ways. To
reach a properly informed view on such a complex subject would
require more time and more evidence. We note in this respect the
recent speech given by the Rt Hon Tony Blair MP, then Prime Minister,
in which he reflected upon the role and behaviour of the media,
commenting that "the regulatory framework at some point will
need revision".[1]
5. This is the third inquiry by a Parliamentary select
committee into regulation of the press since the establishment
of the present system of self-regulation in 1991. The then National
Heritage Committee published its report on Privacy and Media
Intrusion in March 1993,[2]
and our immediate predecessor Committee published a similarly
substantial report, with the same title, in June 2003.[3]
The recurrence of the subject as a matter for Parliamentary inquiry
indicates the sensitivity of the issues.
1 Speech by Rt Hon Tony Blair MP to the Reuters news
agency, 12 June 2007. Back
2
Privacy and media intrusion, Fourth Report of the National
Heritage Committee, Session 1992-93, HC 294 Back
3
Privacy and media intrusion, Fifth Report of the Culture,
Media and Sport Committee, Session 2002-03, HC 458-I Back
|
