lord of the blog

« Regional Government | Main | Responses. murder, the media and Christmas! »

Sunday, December 17, 2006

Privacy and the Press

The Information Commissioner who acts to protect people's privacy has just issued another report calling for tougher sentences to be used against those guilty of invading privacy without a public interest defence. The press is one of the main offenders and the Daily Mail came top in breaches of the Data Protection Act with nearly 1000 attempts to eavesdrop on phone calls or collect information in other illicit ways. The Daily Mirror and People were close behind. Link here for the report:

http://www.ico.gov.uk/about_us/news_and_views/current_topics/what_price_privacy_now.aspx

I issued a press release and wrote to three editors and the Press Complaints Commission saying the papers concerned should tell the victims of their eavesdropping that they had been targeted and offering an apology. Read below for the press release and the letter to the PCC. I await answer with baited breath!

Letter to the Press Complaints Commission: (Chairman, Sir Christopher Meyer)

     Information Commissioner’s Report: What Price Privacy Now?

                           

Following the Information Commissioners report “What Price Privacy Now” I am writing to ask if you intend to make a strong public statement calling on the relevant editors to inform the people on whom they have collected information that they have been targeted in this way?

I know there will be a small number of cases where intrusion of privacy can be justified by a strong public interest defence such as the exposure of serious criminal activity. That however, will only be a small minority of cases and cannot conceivably justify the mass intrusion practised by some of these papers.

I intend to raise this issue in the House of Lords at the earliest opportunity so it would be helpful to know whether you intend to tell editors that these practices are totally unacceptable unless justified by a strong public interest defence and to confirm that the individuals targeted in this way should be informed as soon as possible.

I need hardly tell you that this is a serious breach of the code. It has been common knowledge that activities like this have been taking place over many years. Can I suggest that if you want the PCC to be seen as an effective regulator then you do need to ensure your voice is heard by the wider public and to be seen on the side of the victims and not the perpetrators.

I look forward to an early reply.

Yours sincerely,

Lord Soley of Hammersmith.

                               -------------------------------------

Press release:

                                       

14^th December 2006

 

                                       PRESS RELEASE

                    LORD SOLEY OF HAMMERSMITH

                            EMBARGO: IMMEDIATE

     Information Commissioner’s Report: What Price Privacy Now?

                           

Lord Soley is to write to editors saying they have a duty to inform individuals who have been targeted by newspapers to collect information on them by illegal means.

The report compiled by the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, shows that information is collected by certain media groups and titles by illegal means and that this procedure has not been justified by a proper public interest defence.

Lord Soley said: “This report will not come as a surprise to those who have been targeted for personal information by the press. The people who have been victims of these deceptions have a right to know and the publications concerned should immediately inform them and apologise. The only exceptions should be that relatively small number of cases where there really is a strong public interest such as involvement in serious crime.”

Lord Soley said he was going to raise the issue in Parliament at the earliest opportunity.

Lord Soley said: “I am also writing to some of the editors with the worst record in these cases to ask them if they will tell the individuals concerned and I will also be writing to the Press Complaints Commission to ask them to make a strong public statement condemning the practice and to advise the editors that they have a duty to inform the victims.”

Clive Soley.

Lord Soley of Hammersmith.

The creation of the NHS database - aka the "spine" - in which all our medical records (currently held by our GPs) are to be transferred to a private company for computerisation is likely to enable the press and others to invade our privacy and publish our medical histories - including past abortions, sexual health problems and mental health problems (don't believe the current media hype, this will be possible and is likely to occur). You are entitled to opt out of this. Visit The Big Opt-Out website: http://www.nhsconfidentiality.org/ BMA members are committed to ensuring patient confidentiality and the transfer of your medical history to a national database run by a private company could jeopardise this confidentiality.

It's easy to single out the tabloids for this sort of thing, but I was quite surprised at the BBC's coverage on the Six o'clock news on Monday of the arrest of a suspect in the Ipswich murders case. As I understand it, the person wasn't even charged yet, and was brought in for questioning, but that didn't stop the Beeb camping outside his house and his mother's house with live reports, "exclusive" interviews he'd given privately (did they pass copies to the police before they published them exclusively on the news?). Maybe not illegal, like the examples you mentioned, but surely inadvisable?

Is there really a public interest in knowing who this person is, at this early stage? Does the reporting not imply guilt (or at least "where there's smoke, there's fire")? And doesn't it risk the whole trial if he is eventually charged?

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: