Media Law and Ethics

Lesson One:

During this lesson we have learnt about the code of practice and why journalists have to abide by it, the PPC and what is meant by 'interesting to the public' and 'in the public interest'. Each is important to learning how the creative sector works and especially how written media is presented and controlled.

The code of practice is a set of rules/guidelines that journalist and the media follow to allow the audience to be protected from false information and protect individuals in the medias spotlight. The media need to be able to tell what is right and what is wrong to put in media texts, this is something that the leverson inquiry query weather they can tell the difference.

The PPC stands for Press Complaints Commission, they are an organisation that deals with the complaints about the editorial content of magazine and newspapers published in the UK. They prevent harassment and media intrusion behind the sences, for example if they hear a newspaper is printing false information on a celebrity that could jeopardy their career or reputation, they will stop it, or get the newspaper to write an apology in the next issue. They are a self-regulated organisation which means they arent influenced by any other soucres, though they are funded by the UK's newspaper and magazine industury. There are people that agree with the PPC and how they work and some that dont this is due to conflict in opinion and interest, and also who they are protecting and what they are protecting.

The term 'interesting to the public' means that the information given hasn't got any importance to public, as it isnt going to effect them in any way, the public just find it interesting. An example of this is news that katie price has yet another boyfriend.

The term 'in the public interest' means that the information given that the public NEED to know, this couls be from goverment decission, politics, the general welfare of the public and what is happening out at war. An example of this could be news of the prime minister standing down, or the uk pulling out of Iraq, thias would be in the publics interest.


Lesson Two:

The Leveson Inquiry looks at the culture, practice and ethics of the press, it also looks at the relationships the press have with the police, and the goverment. Our current prime minister David Cameron set up the inquiry, with lord justice leveson as chairman, after the phone hack scandle came to light.

It is important to look at the relationship between the press and police because the public are entitled to about the activities of the criminal justice system and their successes and failures. The relationship between the two should be as open and transparent as possible and based on a mutual trust, if this isn't the case the the whole criminal justice system is 'damaged' according to the Leveson inquiry.

It is important to look at the relationship between the press and politicians because we don't want the the government and media getting to close because of competition and the media could cover up something the government have done which is public interest to know.

The term 'Freedom of Press' means the freedom for the press to communicate and express what they like even if it goes against the government, this is something some countries strongly disagree with.

There is no express privacy law in the UK currently, there are a number of rights that relate to privacy for example the privacy and human rights act 1998 'everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondents. The PPC regulate the press and privacy. 


Freedom of the Press is more important to society than the privacy of individuals

500-800 words
Agree or Disagree

There has always been a big debate of the freedom of the press verses the privacy of individuals, the Leveson Inquiry looks at this debate in depth. Within this essay I am going to look at both sides of this debate and explain why I both agree and disagree with the current situation.

The Leveson Inquiry was set up to look at the culture, practice and ethics of the press, and also the relationship the press have with organisations such as the police and the government. David Cameron set up and appointed Lord Justice Leveson as chairman of the inquiry  after the phone hacking scandal came to light.

The privacy of individuals means that everyone has a right to a private life and this should not be intruded and exploited by anyone including journalists. There are no current laws on privacy in the UK but there are a number of rights that relate to privacy, such as the privacy and human rights act 1998 'everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondents. The PCC (Press Complaints Commission) are currently the ones who deal with the complaints about the invasion of privacy but the Leveson Inquiry aims to change this.

The pharse ‘freedom of press’ means the freedom for the press to communicate and express what they like even if it goes against the government, this is something the UK believes in and follows which is unlike some other countries such as China and Russia who strongly oppose it.

The argument for the privacy of individuals is that the techniques used by journalists to gather information, intrudes peoples right to privacy. Some could say that the journalists are morally bankrupt to use such techniques like going through bins or hacking phones. The press believes that the stories they write are public interest; although to the people they are writing about they are stories that are interesting to the public and just a way to sell their publication. There are many celebrities and other victim of the press that believe that the information gathered and the stories that have been written have ruined lives. An example of this is when JK Rowling had a reported slip a note into her daughter’s school bag as a way of contacting her; there were also a number of photos taken of her children on the beach. The thought her children were getting hassled by the press made her stomach twist, in the Leveson Inquiry she quoted "A child, no matter who their parents are, deserves privacy. Where children are concerned the issue is fairly black and white." One of the main focuses was on the phone hacking scandal, and there was one case in particular, The Milly Dowler case. Milly dowler went missing in 2002 in the Hampshire area; the News of the World hacked into her phone to get voice messages and information to sell their stories. This gave her parents the fake hope she could be alive and disrupted the police investigation. It was later found that she had been murdered; this ruined her parent’s lives especially after believing there was a chance of her still being alive. This is a prime example of the press intruding on police investigations and the privacy of individuals to gather information that well sell their publication.

The argument for the freedom of the press in that they have a job to sell their publications and this does mean writing stories that are interesting to the public as well as public interest. The fact of the matter is that without stories of celebrities slip ups, divorces or information on their private lives (aka controversy) they wont be able to sell their stories/papers as well, they are in a competitive industry and it is important for them to stay a float. The press argue that they uncover the ‘bad guys’ and the bad things they get up to, for example if it wasn’t for illegal journalism techniques we wont of found out about the expenses scandal, which is something that is of public interest to know. Paul McMullen, the ex-editor of News of the World said in an interview that “Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in. Privacy is evil; it brings out the worst qualities in people.” Which to a point is true as he goes on to say that within the 21 years of using these techniques he never found any one doing any good, but you have to bare in mind that journalist never do look for good happy things to write about.

After looking at both sides of the argument I believe that the privacy of individuals is much more important that the freedom of the press. To me the freedom of the press is just a moral saying covering up the fact they are in it to make money and money is not more important than the lives and relations of individuals. Privacy is something everyone is entitled to and shouldn’t be afraid of it being invaded.