Memorandum from The Observer (TS
31)
SUBMISSION ON
PRESS COVERAGE
AND TRANSPORT
SECURITY FOR
THE TRANSPORT
COMMITTEE
I agree that sensationalist media reporting
of terrorism is counter-productive, and we at The Observer
strive for balanced and responsible reporting that nonetheless
gives the public a full and accurate picture of the threat they
may face. We are pleased by the committees recognition that such
reporting can indeed expose the true inhumanity of terrorism.
We are always ready to listen to genuine police
concerns about reporting that may unwittingly jeopardise counter-terrorist
operations or cause unnecessary public alarm. But we believe there
is a powerful public interest in revealing security lapses and
weaknesses in the hope they will be rectified—just as evidence
submitted to your own committee has highlighted potential problems.
Awareness of potential security risks may help increase public
vigilance: it is also information people are entitled to have
in pursuit of their daily lives. We are therefore concerned by
the suggestion that the media should censor itself by not reporting
legitimately acquired information about flaws in security.
Where there are clear good reasons for restricting
information flow in the interests of security, the media have
traditionally co-operated—for instance by not disclosing
in advance, when known, senior British ministerial visits to Iraq
until the individual is on the ground. If there is a genuine,
serious and direct threat to national security from a story a
newspaper wishes to publish, there is already an accepted mechanism
through the D-Notice committee for resolving such issues.
We do not regard any further restrictions as
desirable in the interest of a free press. Nor would we consider
such restrictions practically enforceable: even if some publications
agreed to exercise restraint, inevitably others would not. Whistleblowers
concerned about transport security, such as transport union staff,
could also find other avenues to make their concerns public—for
instance by publishing them online—if suppressed by newspapers.
We hope this is helpful to your inquiry and
await your findings with interest.
January 2006
| 
