Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Journalism question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Journalism question

    Someone I know may have been put in danger by having their address published in the court report of the local paper. The offence was committed years ago, he's since been to prison and been resettled away from the victim, and safe from reprisals. The matter of overwhelming public importance that he went to court to get his driving licence back, successfully. The judge agreed, as his rehab has gone well. Cue a retelling of the old trial, complete with picture from then, and new address.

    Have they done anything wrong here?

    #2
    Journalism question

    Wrong? They've done something bloody awful. They've taken a nothing story and turned it into something 'sensational', years after the fact. Clearly something that this friend had thought was behind him, and reasonably so, is right in front of him again.

    As it's likely all a matter of public record, the paper's probably done nothing wrong from a legal point of view, but they certainly have from an ethical one.

    Comment


      #3
      Journalism question

      The paper hasn't done anything wrong as far as I'm aware. The address would have been given in court so they could report it as details of the trial, but I agree with WOM.

      Comment


        #4
        Journalism question

        They also managed to make it sound like he wormed the licence back. What actually happened was he learnt a new skill inside and needs to drive if he can get work using it. Probation are happy with him, and a resettlement charity are helping him.

        The judge, I think, made the right decision. But Mr Cub Reporter was clearly out for a "soft on crime story".

        Comment


          #5
          Journalism question

          Yeah, didn't think they would have done anything technically wrong.

          Thanks for your thoughts though. Nice to know other people feel like me. I know this all took place in court, which is a matter of public record, but it wasn't an offence. The absolute opposite- he was there because he'd been doing well. Couldn't they respect the rehab process?

          Comment


            #6
            Journalism question

            The main reasons addresses are published in court reports (well, street name if not house number) is to avoid mistaken identity. So that a Tubby Isaacs of a different road or a different area does not have their reputation impugned (or indeed enhanced). Though this sounds like a non-story, but that's an editorial decision issue.

            Comment


              #7
              Journalism question

              I see that principle but shouldn't the editor be able to distinguish between this and an actual crime? It shouldn't have been in the paper at all, and I think it's a shocking editorial decision.

              Comment

              Working...
              X