Are the judges in tune with the public’s view of the public interest?

21 10 2012

Last month Inforrm had a case comment on the decision in which the High Court refused a privacy injunction because the former manager of the England football team was “undoubtedly a public figure”.  As such, he belonged to “the category of those from whom the public could reasonably expect a higher standard of conduct”.   This is an approach which has long been promoted by the tabloid press.   But the independent evidence strongly suggests that it is not the public’s own view of the  public interest.

The recent Hacked Off poll on press regulation shows that 71% of respondents disagreed with the view that “We can trust newspaper editors to ensure that their
journalists act in the public interest” (see Detailed Results, p.4).  But what is the public’s own view of the nature of public interest? There have, in recent years, been two attempts to assess the public’s view of public interest issues.

First, there work done by Stephen Whittle and Glenda Cooper on behalf of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, set out in their report, Privacy, Probity and the Public InterestAfter a wide ranging series of interviews, the authors concluded that most people still regard the following as essentially private: sex and sexuality; health; family life; personal correspondence and finance (except where public monies are concerned).  In response to the argument that a person is a  ‘role model’ the authors argue that it is hard to prove a connection between private behaviour and public actions (see our February 2010 post).

Secondly, Professor Steven Barnett commissioned a public opinion poll from YouGov for the British Journalism Review to test attitudes to the publication of stories which contained some element of intrusion into private or corporate life.  A full report can be found in the original article published earlier this year (and we had a post here).

Respondents were offered three possible answers: the story was “definitely in the public interest” and should be published; the story was not in the public interest “but nevertheless should be published”; the story was a private matter and “should NOT be published”.  One of the examples which was put to the members of the public surveyed concerned a footballer

A well-known England footballer, who is married with young children, is having an affair

Public interest: 6%

Not public interest but should be published: 30%

Should not be published: 58%

In other words, only a tiny minority believed that the “exposure of hypocrisy” of a well known footballer was in the public interest. The other results of the survey are consistent with this approach and it is difficult to see how the position of a former England football manager could be any different.

In short, the view of the Judge in the McClaren case that the publication of the story about a football manager’s extra-marital affair is in the public interest is not in tune with the public’s own view.   It is important not to be misled by the media’s own, self serving assessment of where the balance between privacy and the public interest lies.  The public’s own view is much more sensitive to privacy interests.

About these ads

Actions

Information

3 responses

22 10 2012
Law and Media Round Up – 22 October 2012 « Inforrm's Blog

[...] Are the judges in tune with the public’s view of the public interest? [...]

23 10 2012
News: Carnegie-Demos report on public interest, strict views on publication, strong support for independent regulation « Inforrm's Blog

[...] report provides further support for the argument advanced in an Inforrm post last week that the judges may not be in tune with the public’s own view of the public interest – [...]

18 01 2013
Case Law: Rocknroll v News Group, privacy injunction granted against the “Sun” – Mark Thomson « Inforrm's Blog

[...] Inforrm post in October 2012 asked the question “Are the judges in tune with the public’s view of the public interest?” pointing out that opinion survey evidence suggested that the public took a much stricter [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,698 other followers

%d bloggers like this: