Newspaper’s Double Standards

big-tom
Whilst the Newspapers have received a mild rebuke from the Press Complaints Committee over the Kate Middleton Harassment, most of the criticism has been levelled at the photographers on the ground. Which I find abhorrent, most of the photographers that were at the heart of the criticism were stringers/shifters for national newspapers, specifically ordered there by their respective picture desks.

Whilst some of them didn’t behave in a professional manner and have left themselves open to criticism a great many contented themselves with photographs from the other side of the street and once she had gone put their cameras away/down whatever and went for coffee. A few idiots monstered her and followed her around in cars and on motorbikes, but again most would have been under strict orders from their desks. Trust me it is true in the time that I have worked for the National Newspapers there were numerous occasions that I was asked to go beyond the line of common decency, they were also scared of being caught doing underhand things so would regularly tell me, if questioned you are nothing to do with the XXX Newspaper Group.

So doing something they are not proud of, and not having the gumption to admit it if caught out. What a great industry it is.

According to a select committee report on the PCC and the Newspapers :
“In the case of Ms Middleton, harassment was evident, yet photographs taken by the paparazzi continued to appear in national and regional papers. We see no plausible public interest defence. That is because the paparazzi didn’t take the pictures, most were shifters and stringers in direct pay and control of the newspapers.

“We conclude that editors, in failing to take care not to use pictures of Kate Middleton obtained through harassment and persistent pursuit, breached the Code of Practice. You should be levelling the question, why continue to commission photographers to harass and persistently pursue.

“The PCC appears to have waited for a complaint to materialise: it could and should have intervened sooner. There may be valid reasons why a person who is suffering from media intrusion is reluctant to make a formal complaint. Not likely when the perpetrators are the very same people who run the PCC. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

“The Press Complaints Commission took too long to act to protect Kate Middleton from clear and persistent harassment.” Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? see above

Advertisements

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