A Man and the News of the World

Complaint

The firm of solicitors complained on behalf of their client that an article about him in the News of the World was in breach of Principles 1.1 (Truth and Accuracy), 2.1 (Distinguishing Fact and Comment), 4 (Respect for Rights) and 5.3 (Privacy) of the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Periodicals. They complained that the article contained a number of statements that were either wholly or partially inaccurate. They also complained that a reference to security advice that had been tendered to their client was not only inaccurate but had failed to respect their client’s privacy and the right to privacy of his family and had exploited a situation of personal shock.

The newspaper responded that any statements concerning the complainant in the article, other than biographical details which they said were already in the public domain, were based on firm and solid police information, and were either generally or specifically attributed in the article to confidential Garda or other sources.

Decision

The text of this short article is substantially comprised of statements directly or indirectly attributed to “a senior Garda source”, who is identified as the source early in the article. Insofar as any of the statements complained of are comment, conjecture, rumour or unconfirmed reports directly or indirectly attributed to such a source, the freedom of newspapers to publish such matter is protected under the Code of Practice as long as their attribution to a source – including a confidential source - is clear. The statements under complaint are therefore not in breach of Principle 1 or Principle 2 of the Code of Practice. There is no evidence to support the complaint under Principle 4 that the publication of the statements complained of was motivated by malice or unfounded accusations.

It is clear that the information in the article relating to the security advice that was given to the complainant came from a senior Garda source. Although the publication of such attributed information is protected under Principle 2 of the Code of Practice, newspapers also have a responsibility to ensure that any information they publish does not, under Principle 5, jeopardise the reasonable expectation of privacy either of the person to whom the information relates, or of that person’s family. In the opinion of the Press Ombudsman, the circumstances do not warrant a finding that this has occurred in this particular case, and the complaint under Principle 5.3 is therefore not upheld.

26 January 2009