Writing copy resubmission!

Writing Copy Resubmission
Alan Smith

Primary Research
Further Primary research in relation to Piers Morgan.
Q1: What is your first name?
Matt
Q2: Where are you from? What country? and Location?
Toronto Canada
Q3: How old are you?
19- 25
Q4: Have you ever read, viewed or listened to anything Piers Morgan has taken part in? If so, what? and did you agree with any of the points
he made?
I saw him on CNN all the time, he was terrible at arguing his points. He is kinda an idiot but seems like a nice guy, he shares a British opinion on
gun control which isn't actually bad, but he is just terrible at arguing it.
Q5: Do you feel Piers Morgan was treated unfairly by CNN and were the low ratings all his fault?
it would be unfair of Piers Morgan was fired simply over one issue, they could always ask him to just not interview about gun control; I don't
know if low ratings were his fault.
Q6: Many have signed the petition to get Piers Morgan deported from America. Are they right or wrong? Explain.
Wrong. That's a little extreme. In a country with free speech who values its constitution so much, to deport someone for speaking their opinion
on live TV is pretty hypocritical.
Q7: Do you share Piers Morgans opinion on gun crime in America? Do less weapons provide you with more protection?
Complicated question. Yes and No. More gun control is good because it increases black market gun prices; putting a financial limit on criminals
access to guns. People who are criminally unconnected, lack social skills,, and poor criminals are not going to have access to guns. But more gun
control might make it harder for law abiding citizens to get weapons to defend themselves, in the event they get robbed or assaulted. They have
to be serious about the notion of only good guys having guns.
Q8: What are your thoughts on Piers Morgan being forced to leave the Daily Mirror? Correct decision?
No. I wasn't a fan of Piers, but now that he's gone CNN actually sucks more without him. It was actually a really smart to devote his time to gun
topics, it did what good journalism does, it makes people pissed off and argue.
Q9: Piers Morgan believes that the images that got him the sack from the Daily Mirror were not necessarily fake. Do you agree? Why? Why
not?
I don’t know
Q10: When the name 'Piers Morgan' is brought up, what is the first thing that you associate with him?
Bloke
Tags: Canada, CNN, Gun control, Fired, TV, Criminals, Defend themselves, journalism, social skills, low ratings, arguing, free speech, constitution,
financial limit.
Summary: Matt, a 19-25 year old male from Canada, believes that Piers Morgan
was “terrible” at arguing his points on CNN. He is not fond of Morgan but shares
his beliefs over gun control. He feels it would be “unfair” if Morgan was fired over
one issue [Gun Control] and that the low ratings were not his fault. Matt believes
that it would be “Hypocritical” to deport Morgan because of the free speech in
America. Matt focuses on the gun control answer most in this survey. He shows a
balanced side to it explaining how they can be used to defend yourself. Matt was
“not a fan” of Morgan but he misses him now he has left. He goes onto explain
that it is good journalism to make people argue.

Charlie
London, UK
0-18,
Q4: Have you ever read, viewed or listened to anything Piers Morgan has taken part in? If so, what? and did you agree
with any of the points he made?
I saw him on the one show where he said people who jump in front of trains are selfish. I agree as far as suicide goes, it
does affect other people and could be seen as selfish but to say that on TV? Inappropriate and ignorant of what people
go through to get to that mindset. No thoughts for the families of those people either. Other clips of -im generally being
an ass
No idea about him and CNN
Sorry I don't know why but I wouldn't want him near me.
Q7: Do you share Piers Morgans opinion on gun crime in America? Do less weapons provide you with more
protection?
If that is his opinion then yes. But only if less means no. If only some people give up guns and a large proportion keep
them then it does nothing to improve the situation, people are still at risk.
Hate the daily mirror so have no insight here.
Q9: Piers Morgan believes that the images that got him the sack from the Daily Mirror were not necessarily fake. Do
you agree? Why? Why not?
No clue. Sorry
*insert british swear word here* As you can see I'm not a fan.
Tags: London, selfish, train, suicide, TV, inappropriate, mindset, families, CNN, Opinion, Large proportion, improve the
situation, risk, hate,
Summary: Charlie, a 0-18 year old male from London, focuses on
question 4 where he supports Piers Morgans claims that people who
jump in front of trains are “Selfish”. He does not like Morgan but e
shares Piers Morgan’s opinion on gun crime. He believes that if some
people give up guns and a large proportion keep them it does not
improve the situation.

Chris
England, Birmingham
19- 25
Q4: Have you ever read, viewed or listened to anything Piers Morgan has taken part in? If so, what? and did you agree
with any of the points he made?
ITV's Piers Morgan's Life Stories and I bought a copy of the Daily Mirror when the hoax photos were released. I think he
makes some good points and everyone should be allowed to voice their opinion.
I do, the only thing he was doing was being honest to the public. Something the Americans did not like. The low ratings
were down to his strong views though, yes.
They are all wrong and they go against everything that country stands for!
Yes, if everyone can follow the same idea then it will be a safer country.
The blame had to go somewhere and it was the correct decision. Fake images such as those could have had huge
consequences.
Q9: Piers Morgan believes that the images that got him the sack from the Daily Mirror were not necessarily fake. Do you
agree? Why? Why not?
I think he needs to move on and except they were fake and he should have had them checked.
Strongly Opinionated
Tags: Birmingham, UK, ITV, Daily Mirror, Hoax, voice, opinion, honest, public, Americans, low ratings, blame,
decision, fake images, consequences, opinionated.
Summary: Chris, a 19-25 year old male from Birmingham, watched Piers
Morgan’s life stories and bought a copy of the Daily Mirror with the hoax
photographs. He felt that in relation to CNN, Piers was only being honest
to the public, he went to to say that the strong views were what led to
low ratings though. Chris believes to deport Morgan from America would
be “against everything the country stands for”. He shares the same belief
that America would be safer without guns however only if everyone had
the same idea. Chris believes that the blame for the images had to go
somewhere and could have had “huge consequences.”

Nefes
United States, Indianapolis
26-40
Q4: Have you ever read, viewed or listened to anything Piers Morgan has taken part in? If so, what? and did
you agree with any of the points he made?
Yes, I agree on his stance as far as gun control and as well as the recently published N-Word article
I don't know, but just because his ideas may not match the majority does not mean that he is wrong. majority
public opinion does not always mean it's right.
Q6: Many have signed the petition to get Piers Morgan deported from America. Are they right or wrong?
Explain.
Wrong. He has rights to free speech as long as he is in America, and to deport him for exercising his rights to
free speech goes against everything America stands for.
Q7: Do you share Piers Morgans opinion on gun crime in America? Do less weapons provide you with more
protection?
Yes.
I don't know anything about it.
Q9: Piers Morgan believes that the images that got him the sack from the Daily Mirror were not necessarily
fake. Do you agree? Why? Why not?
I don't know anything about it.
News.
Tags: Indianapolis, gun control, N-word, stance, majority, public opinion, free speech, America, deport, rights,
news.
Summary: Nefes, a 26-40 year old male from Indianapolis, believes
that Morgan was right with his gun control and N-word article.
Nefes believes that “Majority public opinion does not always mean
its right”. He believes that Morgan should have free speech as long
as he is in America. He also agrees that less weapons do provide
you with more protection.

Guy
England, Essex
0-18
Q4: Have you ever read, viewed or listened to anything Piers Morgan has taken part in? If so, what? and
did you agree with any of the points he made?
Yes, Britain's got Talent Yes I did agree, Britain has no talent
Don’t know about this happening
Q6: Many have signed the petition to get Piers Morgan deported from America. Are they right or
wrong? Explain.
Wrong, he has not done anything to harm anyone why get rid of him?
Q7: Do you share Piers Morgans opinion on gun crime in America? Do less weapons provide you with
more protection?
Yes, Guns in America should be cut down
Correct decision, he is a bad writer who gets views by making controversy
Q9: Piers Morgan believes that the images that got him the sack from the Daily Mirror were not
necessarily fake. Do you agree? Why? Why not?
I don't know what Images they are
Everyone hates him
Tags: Britain, harm, Guns, America, Writer, Controversy, hate, views.
Summary: Guy, a 0-18 year old male does not go into much depth with
the responses. He has seen Morgan in Britain's Got Talent. He was not
aware of Piers Morgan being treated unfairly in America and CNN. He
also does not see any reason to get “rid of him” as he has not done
anything to harm anyone. He agrees that guns should be cut down. Guy
agrees strongly with question 8. He believes that Morgan is a “Bad
writer that gets views by making controversy”. Perhaps Guy’s age range
is why he was not aware of the ‘fake images’ and the departure of
Morgan from the Daily Mirror.

Key quotes and tags from Primary Research
Wrong. That's a little extreme. In a country with free speech who values its constitution so much, to deport someone for speaking their opinion
on live TV is pretty hypocritical.
Complicated question. Yes and No. More gun control is good because it increases black market gun prices; putting a financial limit on criminals
access to guns. People who are criminally unconnected, lack social skills,, and poor criminals are not going to have access to guns. But more gun
control might make it harder for law abiding citizens to get weapons to defend themselves, in the event they get robbed or assaulted. They have
to be serious about the notion of only good guys having guns.
(Matt, Toronto)
The blame had to go somewhere and it was the correct decision. Fake images such as those could have had huge consequences.
(Chris, Birmingham)
I don't know, but just because his ideas may not match the majority does not mean that he is wrong. majority public opinion does not always
mean it's right.
Wrong. He has rights to free speech as long as he is in America, and to deport him for exercising his rights to free speech goes against everything
America stands for.
(Nefes, Indianapolis )
If that is his opinion then yes. But only if less means no. If only some people give up guns and a large proportion keep them then it does nothing
to improve the situation, people are still at risk.
(Charlie, London)
Tags: Free Speech, Deported, Gun Control, Blame, Fake Images, America, ITV, Daily Mirror, CNN, Petition, Fired, Public, Opinion.

Drafting for the Fanzine
Possible topics to cover:
Phone Hacking- Louise Mensch, the MP for Corby recently said that Piers Morgan admitted to being part of phone hacking and
even bragged that it won him an award.
She explained it was during a culture, media and sport select committee hearing that they both went to. The allegation of phone
hacking was concerning Sven Goran Eriksson, the former England manager for the national football side.
City Slickers- The ‘’City Slickers’’ case followed in 2000. This was where Morgan bought £20,000 worth of shares in the computer
company Viglen soon before the Mirrors "City Slickers" column tipped Viglen, as a good buy.
Conflict with Jeremy Clarkson- Back when Piers was working for The Mirror, he obtained some imagery that was concerning
Jeremy Clarkson and they were of him kissing another woman which was not his wife.
According to the Guardian, Piers dealt with his in a good way after a very emotional phone call with Clarkson. After supposedly
kissing the same woman again in the years following the first sighting, Morgan then went and ran the story hard, which aggravated
Clarkson to punch him at 2004 Press Awards.
Conflict with Ian Hislop- The allegations made by journalist and comedian Ian Hislop supported this idea of inappropriate
behaviour by Piers Morgan. In 1996, they both featured on ‘Have I Got News For You’, a quiz show about current topics in the
news.
Hislop accused Morgan of having him followed and his house being watched. The conflict went so far that the host of the show,
Angus Deayton, suggested that the two should go outside and fight it out.
Other possible topics for discussion:
German football headline, Petition to get him deported, Fake Images and Daily Mirror
Possible Headlines:
Taking the Piers, Falling to Pierces, Piers Morgan- International man of controversy, Meddling Morgan, Mad Morgan, Moronic
Morgan

Taking the Piers! (First Draft)
When looking at Mr. Morgan we all share the same opinion, don’t we? How does he keep getting away with it? If it is not publishing images
from something as trivial as an alleged Jeremy Clarkson love affair, he is almost starting WW3 with publication of photographs about an Iraqi
prisoner being abused by British soldiers.
Like many of his stories, these were seen to be false and the fake images are what brought him to the end of his eventful Daily Mirror career.
What I am desperate to find the answers to are why he does not get punished further and why do companies still employ this person that is
frowned upon by the majority of the media and public?
This dismissal did not put an end to Morgan’s controversy. When looking at Morgan escaping punishment, the Phone hacking scandal is a
perfect example.
Louise Mensch, the MP for Corby recently said that Piers Morgan admitted to being part of the phone hacking story and even bragged that it
won him an award. She explained it was during a culture, media and sport select committee hearing. The allegation of phone hacking was
concerning Sven Goran Eriksson, the former England manager for the national football side.
She later misquoted one of his lines out of the book ‘The Insider’ published by Morgan in 2005. Piers sprung out to correct her and make her
look foolish. I however still see this to be true and do see Piers as someone who would brag about something as serious as phone hacking.
He later denied any wrongdoing and even the police found him to be clear of any charges when they asked him in for questioning concerning
the matter.
The allegations made by journalist and comedian Ian Hislop supported this idea of inappropriate behaviour by Piers Morgan. In 1996, they
both featured on ‘Have I Got News For You’ a quiz show about current aspects in the news. Hislop accused Morgan of having him followed
and his house being watched. The conflict went so far that the host of the show, Angus Deayton, suggested a fight.
Why is it that Morgan pushes people so hard that they snap and even the most light hearted of comedians can be taken to a high level of
anger?
The ‘’City Slickers’’ case where Morgan bought £20,000 worth of shares in the computer company Viglen soon before the Mirror's "City
Slickers" column tipped Viglen as a good buy.
This is an example where he is seen to be corrupt and using his power as a journalist to another level. Yet no serious action is ever taken over
him. Why?

Morgan was found by the Press Complaints Commission to have breached the Code of Conduct on financial journalism, but kept his job. Perhaps it was
cases such as these that led to the eventual closing down of the regulatory body.
Why did he keep his job but Anil Bhoyrul and James Hipwell, the columnists were seen as breaching the codes of practice and fired just before the enquiry
came to an end.
Why does he find himself in these situations yet he is never to blame? As the newspaper News of the World came crashing down, many of their employees
were seen to be guilty of phone hacking and even pleaded so when under investigation. Neville Thurlbeck, Greg Miskiw and James Weatherup all followed
Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson. Where was Piers Morgan, a former editor of the Sunday paper?
When looking at all the conflict that surrounds Piers Morgan, one story in particular stands out. The way he dealt with the images concerning fellow
journalist and presenter Jeremy Clarkson.
As many of you may well know this resulted in a turn of events that ended up Clarkson hitting Morgan, which to this day many find very amusing.
Back when Piers was working for the Mirror in 2000, he obtained some imagery that was concerning Jeremy Clarkson and they were of him kissing another
woman.
According to the Guardian, Piers dealt with his in a good way after a very emotional phone call with Clarkson. Morgan apparently went ‘soft’ after this,
which many and I find very hard to believe. After supposedly kissing the same woman again in the following years, Morgan then went and ran the story
hard, which aggravated Clarkson to punch him at 2004 Press Awards.
Before the events leading up to the ‘’City Slickers’’ case, there was a separate incident surrounding Morgan’s headline for the Mirror, "Achtung Surrender!
For You Fritz Ze Euro Championship Is Over". One day prior to England against Germany in a semi-final of the Euro '96 football championships.
What happened to Piers after this incident? He had to apologise on television. Could any other journalist get away with a headline of this nature?
Absolutely not. This was very inappropriate and links well to the idea of Louise Mensch’s claim that he hacked Sven Goran Eriksson’s phone.
This perhaps was an obsession with the English national team. This frustration towards football is taken out on social media and Twitter in particular where
he has very strong opinions on the way Arsenal Football club is run. This has led to more conflict, however with the public and his own supporters. Many of
Morgan’s comments now make him an unpopular figure within both the media and society.
In summary, I want to reiterate my anger towards the ease of Piers Morgan being let off on every charge and accusation thrown at him. Surely there must
be a substantial amount of evidence to get him what he deserves? He is abusing his right and power that comes with the job role he has taken and he must
believe that he is invincible. An example of the public’s anger towards him comes with the petition to get him deported from the United States that several
thousand have signed up to. This is from a country that defines it’s self as the land of the free and that everyone can voice his or her opinion in relation to
any topic.

Taking the Piers! (Second Draft)
Why is it that Piers Morgan pushes people so hard that they snap and even the most light hearted of comedians can be taken to a high level of anger and
fury?
When looking at Mr. Morgan we all share the same opinion, don’t we? How does he keep getting away with it?
If it is not Publishing images from something as trivial as an alleged Jeremy Clarkson love affair, he is almost starting WW3 with the publication of
photographs about Iraqi prisoners being abused by British soldiers.
Like many of his stories, these were seen to be false and the fake images are what brought him to the end of his eventful Daily Mirror career.
What I am desperate to find the answers to are why he does not get punished further and why companies still employ this person that is frowned upon by
the majority of the media and public?
This dismissal did not put an end to Morgan’s controversy. When looking at Morgan escaping punishment, the Phone hacking scandal is a perfect
example.
Louise Mensch, the MP for Corby recently said that Piers Morgan admitted to being part of phone hacking and even bragged that it won him an award.
She explained it was during a culture, media and sport select committee hearing that they both went to. The allegation of phone hacking was concerning
Sven Goran Eriksson, the former England manager for the national football side.
She later misquoted one of his lines out of the book ‘The Insider’ published by Morgan in 2005. Piers sprung out to correct her and make her look foolish. I
however still see this to be true and do see Piers as someone who would brag about something as serious as phone hacking.
He later denied any wrongdoing and even the police found him to be clear of any charges when they asked him in for questioning concerning the matter.
The allegations made by journalist and comedian Ian Hislop supported this idea of inappropriate behaviour by Piers Morgan.
In 1996, they both featured on ‘Have I Got News For You’, a quiz show about current topics in the news.
Hislop accused Morgan of having him followed and his house being watched. The conflict went so far that the host of the show, Angus Deayton, suggested
that the two should go outside and fight it out.
The argument carried on further and Hislop went on insinuate that people did not like Morgan. After the show, Piers apparently said to Hislop that he
would be getting “New Neighbours”, adding to the idea of Piers having him watched.
Another incident that got Morgan into trouble was his headline for the Mirror, "Achtung Surrender! For You Fritz Ze Euro Championship Is Over".
One day prior to England against Germany in a semi-final of the Euro '96 football championships.

What happened to Piers after this incident I hear you ask? Of course he had to apologise on television and that was the end of that.
Could any other journalist get away with a headline of this nature? Absolutely not. This was very inappropriate and links well to the idea of
Louise Mensch’s claim that he hacked Sven Goran Eriksson’s phone.
The ‘’City Slickers’’ case followed in 2000. This was where Morgan bought £20,000 worth of shares in the computer company Viglen soon
before the Mirror's "City Slickers" column tipped Viglen, as a good buy.
This is yet another example of his corrupt nature. This is where he uses his power and influence within the media to his advantage rather
than providing a service to the public.
After being found out, no serious action was taken. Why?
Morgan was found by the Press Complaints Commission to have breached the code of conduct on financial journalism, but kept his job.
Perhaps it was cases such as these that led to the eventual closing down of the regulatory body. Perhaps they were too soft.
Why did he keep his job but Anil Bhoyrul and James Hipwell, the columnists behind the City Slickers were fired just before the enquiry came
to an end?
In 2004, further enquiry by the Department of Trade and Industry resulted in saying that Morgan would not face charges whereas on the 7th
December 2005 Bhoyrul and Hipwell were convicted of conspiracy to breach the Financial Services Act.
During the trial it emerged that Morgan had in fact bought £67,000 worth of Viglen shares, emptying his bank account and investing under
his wife's name too. £67,000!
This was more than three times as much as what was first believed.
Investing under his wife’s name! You just couldn’t make it up. How is it that Morgan is never found guilty?
Why does he find himself in these situations yet he is never to blame?
2004 was an eventful year as it was later found out that Sven Goran Eriksson’s phone was hacked and over a four-year period that exposed
his sex life.
Greg Miskiw, a news editor, tasked the specialist hacker Glenn Mulcaire to hack Eriksson.

As the newspaper News of the World came crashing down, many of their employees were seen to be guilty of phone hacking and even
pleaded so when under investigation.
Neville Thurlbeck, Greg Miskiw and James Weatherup all followed Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson to appear before a judge.
Where was Piers Morgan? He was a former editor of the Sunday paper.
When looking at all the conflict that surrounds Piers Morgan, one story in particular stands out. The way he dealt with the images concerning
fellow journalist and presenter Jeremy Clarkson and their long running feud.
As many of you may well know this resulted in a turn of events that ended up Clarkson hitting Morgan, which to this day many find very
amusing.
Back when Piers was working for The Mirror, he obtained some imagery that was concerning Jeremy Clarkson and they were of him kissing
another woman which was not his wife.
According to the Guardian, Piers dealt with his in a good way after a very emotional phone call with Clarkson. Morgan apparently went ‘soft’
after this, which many and I find very hard to believe.
After supposedly kissing the same woman again in the years following the first sighting, Morgan then went and ran the story hard, which
aggravated Clarkson to punch him at 2004 Press Awards.
In summary, I want to reiterate my anger towards the ease of Piers Morgan being let off on every charge and accusation thrown at him.
Surely there must be a substantial amount of evidence to get him what he deserves? He is abusing his right and power that comes with the
job role he has taken and he must by now believe that he is invincible.
An example of the public’s anger towards him comes with the petition to get him deported from the United States that several thousand
have signed up to.
This is from a country that defines itself as the land of the free and that everyone can voice his or her opinion in relation to any topic.
(End of Second Draft)

Task 5
It is no secret that CNN have been struggling for viewers since Piers Morgan took over from Larry King 3 years ago. This was seen in January with CNN's third-worst
ratings in its whole history. We want to understand how much the public actually knows about the man who is wanted out by over 100,000 American citizens who have
signed a petition for him to be deported.
As we all know, Piers Morgan is someone who loves to voice his opinion on all that is America. We all understand what the public over here in the states think, so looking
towards a British audience will provide much better insight. Opinion is starkly divided amongst the public as to the reasons for the low ratings. Some feel Morgan himself
is to blame, whilst others point to wider issues in American society.
“Just because his ideas did not match the majority that does not mean that he is wrong” Nefes from Indianapolis. Majority public opinion does not always mean that it is
right. Perhaps there is a much more obvious reason to the fall in viewers, perhaps it is the audience that is not willing to listen to the current beliefs in a changing world?
Other viewers who think it is the clash between Morgan’s style and American culture that was to blame echo this sentiment. All too often, dissenting voices, critical of
American society, are pushed to the margins. “The only thing he was doing was being honest to the public, something the Americans did not like” Chris from Birmingham
Many Americans do not know or do not want to know about the issues Morgan raises. He does not sugar coat his thoughts. He says it exactly how it is. Perhaps the
audience needs to change rather than the people explaining the issues.
The conflict between many of the listeners and Morgan may have come from his time in England and the decision to relieve Morgan from his duties as Editor of The
Mirror newspaper. This was something of an inevitability. “Correct decision, he is a bad writer who gets views by making controversy” Guy from Essex. “The blame had to
go somewhere”. This is an interesting point. Is it not a sign of a good journalist that makes the audience create their opinion and interact with a piece of writing. Is Piers
Morgan not just doing his job?
The images published about a possible attack on Iraqi prisoners by British Soldiers was where Piers Morgan started to get this reputation. These were later seen to be
false. “Fake images such as those could have had huge consequences”
This was something unknown in America, however very important when looking at the ethics surrounding Piers Morgan. When looking into war, we all know what Piers
Morgan believes about gun crime in this country. It was in fact in his last show at CNN where he took yet another swipe at the gun control in the country. Morgan, whose
show was cancelled in February, had angered conservatives in the US during his three-year run by repeatedly attacking US gun laws.
"The scourge of gun violence is a disease that now affects every aspect of American life’’ Morgan said. This quote represented his time at CNN. It reflected all his beliefs
and how he presented himself. The use of the word ‘disease’ expresses his passion towards the topic and the use of the ‘American life’ makes it that much more personal
to the audience. The reason could be Piers Morgan for the low ratings, but the underlining issue could be guns. His thoughts are one reason but perhaps we should
explore the major concerns in the country.
“If only some people give up guns and a large proportion keep them then it does not improve the situation, people are still at risk” Charlie from London. “If everyone can
follow the same idea then it will be a safer country”. Here it is clear that Morgan does make some valid points and is not totally on the hunt for controversy as some may
claim. The thoughts on gun crime are not echoed in large parts of America, however he is entitled to his opinion. Whether or not he should share that on television is
another question. After all the topics Piers Morgan covers, it has now become very hard for some Americans to take. The petition to deport him reflects this. “He has
right to free speech as long as he is in America”. “To deport him for exercising his rights to free speech would go everything America stands for” Nefes, an American
citizen.

Task 7- Drafting
Introduction
-Last night Piers Morgan was sacked as editor of the Daily Mirror. This comes after a crunch meeting with boss Sly Bailey
over the Iraq ‘torture’ photographs.
Small pieces of information supporting the main topic
-Piers had worked there for eight and a half years.
-“The Daily Mirror published in good faith photographs which it absolutely believed were genuine images of British
soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner”, the newspaper said.
-The Queen's Lancashire Regiment however proved that they were staged and set up a strong campaign over the
Mirror's handling of the images.
-Downing Street were informed however they refused to comment on the topic and left the Mirror to sort their own
mess out.
-Des Kelly, Morgan’s deputy will now replace him in the short term running of the paper.
Relevant quotes-
-“It is just a great pity it has taken so long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime.”
-“They were a calculated and malicious hoax.”
-“Inappropriate for Morgan to continue as editor.”
-“All I want to say is we published the truth.”
-“We have revealed a can of worms. If the government chooses to ignore that, it is entirely a matter for them.”
-“This was about the life of British soldiers, and you can't tough it out when you're wrong”
A quick sentence to conclude. -Now there will be further investigations into these images and of the British soldiers
concerned.

Tabloid (First Draft)
Piers Morgan FIRED!
Friday 14th May 2004
Tonight Piers Morgan has been relieved sacked of his duties as editor of the Daily Mirror. This comes after a crunch meeting with chief executive boss Sly Bailey over the
Iraq ‘torture’ photographs.
Piers had worked there for eight and a half years however this was one action the newspaper could not ignore. Just before his dismissal he was fired, Piers was asked to say
sorry for his actions that gave the paper such a bad name.
He refused and just after 6 o’clock this evening they let him go. Shortly after being fired he spoke to the media. “If nobody knows the provenance of these photographs, why
should we apologise?” he said.
The pictures Piers published caused so much distress because they are of British soldiers apparently abusing Iraqi prisoners. The Queen's Lancashire Regiment however
proved that they were staged and set up a strong campaign over the Mirror's handling of the images.
They also explained how the Mirror put British troops in danger by running the photographs. In one picture a soldier is seen urinating on a hooded man while in another the
hooded man is being hit with a rifle in the groin.
It is from this where The Sun newspaper had offered a £50,000 reward for “Information about the fake Mirror photos” They took the offer back shortly after Morgan’s
firing.
Roger Goodman of the regiment said, “It is just a great pity it has taken so long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime.”
The Mirror explained earlier today “They were a calculated and malicious hoax.”
“The Daily Mirror published in good faith photographs which it absolutely believed were genuine images of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner”, the newspaper said.
The aftermath left Piers Morgan without a job as the paper believed it would be “Inappropriate for Morgan to continue as editor.”
With this being such a delicate situation, Downing Street were informed however they refused to comment on the topic and left the Mirror to sort their own mess out.
Piers’ departure has left many shocked because this morning prior to his late meeting he spoke with such energy and confidence when speaking to ITV. “All I want to say is
we published the truth.”
“We have revealed a can of worms. If the government chooses to ignore that, it is entirely a matter for them.” He went on to say. From this it explains Piers has not shown
any remorse for his actions and believes he did everything properly.
Des Kelly, Morgan’s deputy will now replace him in the short term running of the paper. When Kelly spoke out he explained that all the staff were in tears when it was first
announced. His colleagues may have been sad to see him leave, however many people agree with the decision to let Piers go. Andrew Neil the former editor of the Sunday
times leads the shots fired towards Piers.
“This was about the life of British soldiers, and you can't tough it out when you're wrong” Now there will be further investigations into these images and of the British
soldiers concerned.

Tabloid (Second Draft)
Piers Morgan FIRED!
Friday 14th May 2004
Last night Piers Morgan was sacked as editor of the Daily Mirror. This comes after a crunch meeting with boss Sly Bailey over the
Iraq ‘torture’ photographs.
Piers had worked there for eight and a half years however this was one action the newspaper could not ignore. Just before he
was let go, Piers was asked to say sorry for his actions that gave the paper such a bad name. He refused and just after 6 o’clock
last night they sent him packing.
Shortly after being fired he spoke to the media. “If nobody knows the provenance of these photographs, why should we
apologise?” he said.
The pictures Piers published caused so much distress because they are of British soldiers apparently abusing Iraqi prisoners.
The Queen's Lancashire Regiment however proved that they were staged and set up a strong campaign over the Mirror's handling
of the images.
They also explained how the Mirror put British troops in danger by running the photographs. In one picture a soldier is seen
urinating on a hooded man while in another the hooded man is being hit with a rifle in the groin.
It is from this where The Sun newspaper had offered a £50,000 reward for “Information about the fake Mirror photos”
They took the offer back shortly after Morgan’s firing. Roger Goodman of the regiment said, “It is just a great pity it has taken so
long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime.” The Mirror explained yesterday morning “They were a
calculated and malicious hoax.” “The Daily Mirror published in good faith photographs which it absolutely believed were genuine
images of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner”, the newspaper said.
The aftermath left Piers Morgan without a job as the paper believed it would be “Inappropriate for Morgan to continue as editor.”
Downing Street were informed however they refused to comment on the topic and left the Mirror to sort their own mess out.
Piers’ departure has left many shocked because this morning prior to his late meeting he spoke with such energy and confidence
when speaking to ITV. “All I want to say is we published the truth.”
“We have revealed a can of worms. If the government chooses to ignore that, it is entirely a matter for them.” He went on to say.
From this it explains Piers has not shown any remorse for his actions and believes he did everything properly.
Des Kelly, Morgan’s deputy will now replace him in the short term running of the paper. When Kelly spoke out he explained that
all the staff were in tears when it was first announced.
His colleagues may have been sad to see him leave, however many people agree with the decision to let Piers go.
Andrew Neil the former editor of the Sunday times leads the shots fired towards Piers.
“This was about the life of British soldiers, and you can't tough it out when you're wrong”
Now there will be further investigations into these images and of the British soldiers concerned.

Task 10
Social and Cultural awareness
To define social awareness it would be that you should know what is socially acceptable from you
in society and you should therefore act in that manner. Cultural awareness however means that
you should know the different cultures reading the newspaper for example or other media
products. You should respect and appreciate the differences in culture.
Understanding and following these are important when studying to be a journalist because the way
people are presented in your work may form the opinion of the public reading it. It is vital your work
is fair and unbiased.
To learn which aspects in writing you should be very accurate and balanced with, the NUJ have
produced a list that you can follow. Learning this as a trainee of the union can give you the best
possible start.
Terrorism, Race, Asylum and Immigration, HIV, Age, Disability and Suicide are all part of the
guidelines you should follow when reporting on a story given to you. By following and taking these
topics into account when producing your work you will avoid any upset within the public reading the
media as well as stopping any further discrimination by adding to the readers beliefs and
misconceptions about people in these categories already.
The NUJ's code of conduct was first developed in 1936. The union has an ethics committee which
is responsible for developing the NUJ's policy on ethics and provides advice for members. The 12
rules set should be followed at all times.

1) At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of
expression and the right of the public to be informed.
This first point explains the need for the public to be informed. They must be informed with
correct information and not opinion. Opinion can be used, however as it states about media
freedom and expression.
2) Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair.
This second point makes it very clear that the information is accurate and fair rather than
you, the journalist making it sound like something it is not to fit in with your opinion. Honest
information should be presented so the reader can make their own opinion.
3) Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies.
This third rule looks into the correction of harmful inaccuracies. These can be in relation to
the guidelines on the previous slide.
4) Differentiates between fact and opinion.
This can often get confusing in articles when writers get very passionate about their topic.
It is important to remain professional and realise that you are providing a service for the
public and they want news not your opinion on it.

5) Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of
investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence
that cannot be obtained by straightforward means.
Many of the rules cover the same issues concerning the importance to produce honest,
reliable and straightforward articles that clearly show the difference to what is fact and what
your opinion on the matter is. These rules are to make sure the journalist understands and
abides by them.
6)Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by
overriding consideration of the public interest.
This covers over harassing people to gather information to produce a good story. This is
wrong. If the public can benefit from you going out of your way to cause grief then it can be
seen as acceptable, however in most cases this is a rule that needs to be followed.
7) Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material
gathered in the course of her/his work.
It is important that if a source asks not to be mentioned, you respect their wishes and not
include the name as this goes against their right to privacy.
8) Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and
takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties
before the information is public knowledge.

Again, this looks over the idea of taking the power of the occupation into your own
advantage. This is wrong, you should be providing information to the public as they
have a right to know and this should be as soon as possible. If you have the information
then you must produce it and inform the public.
9) Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a
person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or
sexual orientation.
All the rules have equal importance, however this one you must make sure you abide
by. Producing material that can lead to discrimination is something that should not
happen. If the reader already has hatred towards one of these groups then adding to it
through the idea of ‘news’ then this can have bad consequences. The work you produce
should avoid any material in relation to disability
or race or any other important aspect. Unless you can portray them in a clear manner
which does not lead to hatred.
10) Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any
commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the
medium by which she/he is employed.
You should not promote you work in any way to get your article or piece out there.
Forcing information to the public is not right. Providing the service should be the public
wanting to choose for example the newspaper you work for over another.

11) A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when
interviewing or photographing a child for a story about her/his welfare.
This is a very delicate rule and needs to be understood. When working with children
your story, it is very important that a parent or guardian has allowed you to do so.
12) Avoids plagiarism.
This can be a very common factor within the media industry and that of taking credit for
someone else’s work. This is wrong. If you want to include extracts from a piece then
you must state clearly where it is from and by who.
The NUJ code includes a new 'conscience clause’ This states that can refuse to
produce work in breach of the code and will be given the support of their union if they
do so.
A good example of the backing towards the clause was from Lord Justice Leveson
recently. Sir Brian Henry Leveson is an English judge, currently the President of the
Queen's Bench Division.
Leveson chaired the public inquiry into
the culture, practices and ethics of the British press, prompted by the News of the World
phone hacking affair.

A connotation is something that is implied when a word is used, whereas a denotation is the
actual definition. A connotation is the opposite to denotation.
In relation to journalism and the way journalists produce their work it is important that the correct
words and phrases are used to describe a person. The way in which you describe someone or
something can influence the reader.
The reaction to connotations can be either cultural or emotional. There are positive and negative
connotations that feature in pieces of text.
For example; Dove meaning peace, Hollywood meaning fame and Wall street suggesting wealth.
With this there must be negatives as well.
Using words such as chicken meaning coward or referring to a woman as babe.
Mistakes can easily be made in your work so the NUJ have set more guidelines, this time to set
out what words you should use. There is also a contact number to ask someone for help before
writing a piece of text.
Examples include; Bum- Homeless, Childish- Childlike, Difficult- Challenging, Fat- Overweight,
Fired- Terminated, Job- Career, Conceited- Self confident.
The way a journalist phrases one word can determine how successful they become and how
many people they may anger.
You need to make sure that all your work is fair, balanced and does not harm any of the readers.

31 percent of headlines and 53 percent of text about asylum across all newspapers has negative
connotations.
Is it any wonder why many of the readers are becoming extremely angry?
Many people now come to the understanding that politicians and the media made us hate
immigrants.
It is a common belief that the problem is not immigration but socio-economic inequality.
Media outlets often inflate or speculate about numbers of asylum seekers, refugees and
immigrants.
Newspaper and TV images play into the dominant stereotype of the young dangerous man
breaking into Britain and threatening our communities.
Language used to describe immigration is highly hostile across all newspaper types, with “illegal”
and “bogus” the most commonly used terms to describe immigrants and asylum seekers.
In addition to misreporting, there is also ‘over-reporting’.
In 2002, 25% of Daily Mail and 24% of Daily Express articles were about asylum.
This idea of over reporting ties in well with the idea of bias and not balancing articles.
These newspapers such as the Daily Mail and The Daily Express make an article to suit their own
agenda and is made in a way to relate to their opinions on the matter.

The NUJ have clear guidelines on all aspects in relation to making sure you are not being
offensive in the work you produce that is a service to he public. Guidelines on reporting
immigration and asylum: Use the term "immigrant" with caution, it is still wrongly used to describe
people born in Britain. Asylum seeker, refugee or EU migrant worker?
Get the terminology right. Asylum seeker is a person who has left their home country as a
political refugee and is seeking asylum in another country. A refugee is someone who was an
asylum seeker but who has now been granted refugee status. An EU migrant worker is someone
who has moved to the UK to work. Their stay in the UK may be temporary or longer term.
When quoting politicians or public figures, verify if their statements on immigration are factual.
Ask experts who can help set the context and ensure you check details with a reputable source.
Many allegations are made about asylum seekers, ensure you substantiate them, if they are
unable to be verified, make this clear.
Don't use terms such as "bogus", "illegal" or "failed" asylum seeker. If necessary, use "refused"
asylum seeker instead. A fairer term to use for someone who has outstayed their visa is
"undocumented" or "irregular".
Don't use emotive language such as "floods" of immigrants. Stick to facts. These guidelines are
very clear and detailed. You must stick to these, if you are not sure at any point during the
process of writing and article. Make sure you ask the union.
In terms of general guidelines you must only include a person's race if relevant. Check that you
have it right. Would you mention race if the person was white? Do not assume a cultural
background from a person's name – check with them or their community. Remember that Black
communities are culturally diverse. Get a full and correct view from representative organisations.

When journalists write they have an image in their mind on who the reader will be. It is from this
that the language used may be changed to relate to them as the journalist will see them as
sharing the same opinion.
That is not the case. Anybody could pick up the newspaper or magazine and find to be insulted
by it. Is from this that you need to make sure that the piece is well balanced, accurate and does
not cause any offense. When looking at producing work to those who you believe share the
same ethics and beliefs it is important to look at Stuart Hall, a Jamaican-born cultural theorist
and sociologist.
There is a huge amount of detail concerning Hall and what he wrote about. Reception theory is
something that can be relevant towards journalists. Also known as audience reception, this is
when a group of readers have a shared cultural background and interpret the text in similar
ways.
It is likely that the less shared heritage a reader has with the artist, the less he or she will be
able to recognise the artist's intended meaning, and it follows that if two readers have vastly
different cultural and personal experiences, their reading of a text will vary greatly.
From this it explains that the less the person reading about the article knows about the writer the
more offended they will be, this is due to not understanding their meaning behind it. The idea of
different cultures is important. People may not understand the way you have written something
as it may be something they have not experienced before.
This means that as a journalist you must expect people to have never read from this newspaper
before and you must be careful and balanced with every topic as people can interpret things in
different ways. Making sure your article causes no offense is all that can be asked from you.

The Oxford Dictionary describes credibility as ‘the quality of being believable or worthy of trust’
This is vital for journalists because without the trust of the readers they will find it difficult to believe any piece of text that is
written. Once seen as not credible then journalists will see value on stories go down.
In order to be credible a journalist much follow five aspects. They must be Objective, Accurate, Truthful, Fair and Balanced in all
the work they produce.
Objective: Journalists should be impartial for any subject they write about. It is important to avoid having an agenda in your work
and you should not include an article to enhance your beliefs and influence the reader to agree with you. To be credible you must
understand how to present information and avoid being prejudice.
This idea of an agenda is demonstrated well in newspapers. The idea of choosing between left and right wing. Left being papers
such as The Independent that are seen to be very credible, whereas ‘The Sun’ on the right, less so.
To make the point of objectivity the example of ‘The Cook Report’ is a good one. This was a British current affairs television show
that featured on ITV from 1987. This was seen to be a credible source of information as Roger Cook who was behind the show
was an BAFTA award winning investigative journalist and broadcaster.
However, in 2000 ‘News of the World’ (Hugely right wing at the time) published a series of front page allegations claiming that
The Cook Report had faked a number of programmes in which crimes were set up for Roger Cook to solve.
Even though Roger Cook and Members of the production team issued writs for Libel against the former newspaper, their
credibility was still damaged due to the report. This clearly shows how
much influence a paper can have over the public. News of the World demanded an investigation was made by the Independent
Television Commission.
After witnesses for the defense had voluntarily retracted their paid-for testimony, The News of the World reluctantly had to agree
with the ITC’s conclusions and made a statement to that effect in open court.
This idea of paid for testimonies is a perfect example into credibility and the idea of taking part in certain actions to produce
something that makes your investigation look as if it is correct. The News of the world was later investigated and on the 7th July
2011, after 168 years in print they were shut down due to allegations into the phone hacking scandal.
After the loss of 200 jobs the credibility of the newspaper was completely lost. This newspaper was not objective in its reports
over the years and especially on the accusations surrounding Roger Cook. It is important to not attack people with your agenda
and opinions. Base all your work on fact.

The next point when looking into how to be seen as credible is that of accuracy. It is very
important that all the work you produce is correct and based on facts and figures you have
gathered from reliable sources. To be seen as credible you must makes sure the basic names,
dates, times and quotes are all correct. This may be seen as somewhat of a formality, however
many journalists can get this wrong and the consequences can be huge for those involved.
An example of where distress and harm has been caused by creating articles without checking
the source would be The Sunday People issuing an apology to Roger Moore. On 16 September
we published an article headed “I’ve had Moore women than James Bond” which claimed that Sir
Roger Moore had recently spoken exclusively to The People and made comments to our
journalist about his private life.
We now accept that Sir Roger did not give an interview to our reporter and did not make the
comments that were reported in the headline. We apologise for any distress and embarrassment
our article has caused to Sir Roger Moore and we have agreed to pay him damages and legal
costs.
This looks into the idea that a newspaper can just make up a story and without thinking about the
people it may cause. The statement accepts that they did not give an interview with Roger
Moore. It is from this where the public may start to realise how credible the Sunday People is and
perhaps look at alternatives.
It is from this where IPSO was created. To deal with complaints. Starting in September 2014 and
taking over from the press complaints commission this regulatory body tries to maintain and
measure performance and that journalists follow the editors code of practice. If they do not then
they are set up to deal with issues concerning something published.

The third aspect and perhaps the most important behind being seen as a credible journalist is being able to
report the truth.
Without this in the work you produce you could face serious actions taken against you both legal and ethical.
You must make sure you produce fact and actual news rather than your opinion or something made up in order
to grab attention of the reader. Producing false articles and putting words in peoples mouths can lead to your
reputation being ruined but more importantly the person you are wrongly accusing being judged wrongly by the
public.
Many journalists do not understand the meaning of being truthful and some often bend ‘facts’ to tie in with what
they are saying about someone or something. As a journalist you have a professional obligation to assemble
and verify facts. Why don’t newspapers tell the truth? They are focused on selling their product rather focusing
on facts as these can often be seen as less exciting.
An example to support is taken from the London Evening Standard.
In their diary article “Museum finally signs its deal to be fine and dandy” they referred to the exhibition of the
late Sebastian Horsley’s suits at the Museum of London and the Whoresley show, an exhibition of his pictures
at the Outsiders Gallery. By unfortunate error they referred to Rachel Garley, the late Sebastian Horsley’s
girlfriend, who arranged the exhibitions, as a prostitute.
“We accept that Ms Garley is not and has never been a prostitute. We offer our sincere apologies to Ms Garley
for the damage to her reputation and the distress and embarrassment she has suffered as a result”
Stating this without any evidence to back up the claim can have disastrous consequences for everyone. Rachel
Garvey now has to rebuild her reputation whereas the newspaper will need to work very hard to be seen as
credible by many of their readers now.
It is clear this was not truthful and puts the point very clearly. As a journalist you want to build yourself a good
reputation to be known as reliable and trustworthy. Our working journalists who follow the guidelines set are
very established because of it.

The last part to being able to say you are a credible journalist is that of being both fair and balanced in all that
you write. Number 2 in the NUJ Codes of Practice states that you Strive to ensure that information
disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair.
Being fair involves mentioning both sides to an argument and not just explaining one side to a story to suit with
your own agenda as part of working for a newspaper.
It is clear papers are divided between both wings and from this there are readers who believe certain aspects in
the world and therefore purchase a particular newspaper.
It is important that when working on a piece you can say that you have produced a balanced report, not just
placing the other side to a story near the end of the piece. Overlooking or ignoring one side is not right and just
the same as using facts and figures to sway a story or piece into your opinion. The common way is to use
‘experts’ on articles.
These experts are seen to to legitimise a story. But often the public ignore that these people have their own
opinions on matters. Quoting and using someone who believes with your beliefs as a paper is not helping to
create a balanced story and is not fair.
These “experts” are always members of left-wing. In relation to an abortion case these experts would give their
say on it but they are never identified for their bias. The media has gone out of its way for years to push the
liberal agenda on abortion.
Bias by selection of source. “Experts say”, “Most people believe” “Observers say”. These are often used in
stories to make them “reliable”. These often never state who this person is quoting on a piece, it could be
anyone. The newspaper could have taken them off the street. Just because they are used, it does not make
them a reliable source of information.
Bias by commission looks into the point about being balanced. Papers completely leave out one persons
opinion on a matter to make them look like they are in the wrong and the papers point is backed up by the other
side they mention more than the other.

Legal and Ethical Obligations
Defamation is defined as the action of damaging the good reputation of someone. The Free online Dictionary explains
defamation to be:
Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, re
gard, or confidence
in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.
Defamation may be a criminal or civil charge. It encompasses both written statements, know as LIBEL, and spoken state
ments, called slander. To understand this further there is a good example in the media. Thomas Sheridan against News
Group Newspapers. This was a civil court case brought by Tommy Sheridan against the publishers of the News of the
World. On the 4th July 2006 he alleged that the News of the World defamed his character through a series of articles in
their publication. Tommy Sheridan is a Scottish politician and the allegations against the paper were in order to protect his
reputation.
Key points- News of the World’s defence was that Sheridan had engaged in adulterous affairs with other women. And
attended swingers clubs in Manchester and Sheffield. This was supported by 18 witnesses that testified they had sexual
relations with Sheridan while he was married. National Union of Journalists Scottish Organiser Paul Holleran admitted
advising Tommy Sheridan who was a NUJ member. Six witnesses were also called to support Sheridan's claim. The
judge decided that due to the nature of the conflicting witness evidence, it may be necessary to investigate. Later that
day the jury decided that Tommy Sheridan had been defamed. The News of the World was ordered to pay damages of
£200,000. (This is how many defamation cases end, with the newspaper being in the wrong and having to pay a huge
fine, however this was one rare occasion that they were correct)
What happened next? The fine was not paid and News of the World's editor Bob Bird immediately announced the
newspaper intended to appeal the verdict on the basis of perjury against the ‘witnesses’. On 16 December 2007 Tommy
Sheridan was charged with perjury and later 6 others were also. It is estimated that the costs of this investigation may
reach £500,000.
In summary, Defamation is something to be taken seriously. This case is somewhat of an anomaly and should you run a
story hard it can harm a reputation. The NUJ does offer advice like we did for Thomas Sheridan when it was the
understanding he was incident. It is important to gather correct information.

The Oxford Dictionary defines Copyright as:
The exclusive and assignable legal right, given to the originator for a fixed number of years, to print,
publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material.
In relation to Journalists, they must be careful not to break copyright law by reproducing work which is
not theirs without permission.
Plagiarism (The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own) is
something that can be done by journalists and it is important that the work you claim to be yours, is!
An example of Plagiarism In the media is:
In an October 2007 column for The Sun-Herald, Australian television presenter David Koch plagiarised
verbatim three lines from a column in The Sunday Telegraph.
Koch stated to Media Watch: "... it has since been pointed out to me that these 3 sentences look as
though they came from a similar story in another newspaper. While that was not obvious in the
research brief it isn't an excuse and I take full responsibility for the mistake.”
David James Koch, nicknamed Kochie’s credibility was then questioned after.
Number 12 and the last point in the NUJ code of conduct is ‘Avoid Plagiarism’ It is from this where the
NUJ and many other places offer advice over plagiarism and there is an online checker to reassure
your work has not been used elsewhere.
If you do use someone else’s work, not a problem, as long as you reference where you got it from.

When dealing with children and young people, it is vital that they are treated in a certain way. An example of this was in
the media. Weller vs. Associated Newspapers Limited.
In April earlier this year, Paul Weller and his family won a total of £10.000 in damages for the misuse of private
information.
The background in this is that Paul Weller and his family were in an article by Mail Online. The heading being ‘A family
day out’ and they had been followed by paparazzi.
Under that heading there were seven images of the family in Los Angeles. The first child in the photographs was Dylan
Weller, then aged 16, who was wrongly described as Hannah Weller, Paul Weller’s wife.
As well as Dylan, the images contained twins John-Paul and Bowie, both who were 10 months old.
David Sherborne, lawyer for the Weller family, said Hannah Weller - the mother of the twins - had not been in the public
eye before her marriage and had taken active steps to prevent their faces being seen in the media. Photos taken in the
street, and not in circumstances such as premieres or for promotion, were a "blatant impediment to the natural social
progress of children", he said.
“There was no relevant debate of public interest to which the publication of the photographs contributed. The balance
of the general interest of having a vigorous and flourishing newspaper industry does not outweigh the interests of the
children in this case,” Mr. Justice Dingemans.
"The photographs showed nothing more than Paul Weller and three of his children out and about in public places,” The
Mail said.
"There was no claim and no finding that we had followed, harassed or targeted Mr. Weller or his children and no
request had ever been made to pixellate the children's faces.
It is important that when becoming a journalist you take into account the young children that may be risked by your
reports or images. This example shows how a family in the media lime light can be affected. This however is not just
concerning celebrity children.

Young people should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary
intrusion.
A child under 16 must not be interviewed or photographed on issues involving their
own or another child’s welfare unless a custodial parent or similarly responsible adult
consents.
Pupils must not be approached or photographed at school without the permission of
the school authorities.
Minors must not be paid for material involving children’s welfare, nor parents or
guardians for material about their children or wards, unless it is clearly in the child's
interest.
Editors must not use the fame, notoriety or position of a parent or guardian as sole
justification for publishing details of a child’s private life.
This was in relation to the example. Dylan Weller was 16 and his parents were not
consulted. The same issues were surrounding their twin boys both 10 months old.
This last point was something that meets the same understanding Justice Dingemans
had over the case and that of using Paul Weller’s fame as a reason to publish images
of the children, something that is not in the public interest and should not happen.

“Journalists have a moral obligation to protect confidential sources of information”.
Taken from the Editors Code of Practice. This reflects the views of many journalists and takes into account the people
they have to speak to when looking into an article.
Often, these people journalists speak people who have done something illegal or taking part in illegal events.
Confidentiality is about the expectation you have of someone keeping your secrets – The law states that a person who
has obtained information in confidence must not take unfair advantage of it unless you are given permission otherwise
you can be sued.
There are three aspects to a breech of confidence:
-The information must have ‘the necessary quality of confidence’
-The information must have been imparted in circumstances imposing an obligation of confidence
-There must be an unauthorised use of that information to the determent of the party communicating it
The use of confidential sources should be avoided whenever possible. Putting aside the legal implications, attributing
information to unnamed people hinders your readers’ ability to assess the credibility of your sources and by extension
you.
If you decide that information is newsworthy to warrant a promise of confidentiality, consider the following tips, which
may help protect you in a defamation suit based on the information.
-Discuss the scope of confidentiality with the source, establishing a clear agreement about when and to whom, if
anyone, you will disclose the source’s identity.
-Make clear that you are not reporting the information as incontrovertible fact and caution the reader that it is based on
material provided by a person who asked that his or her identity not be revealed.
Confidentiality

Official Secrets Act
People working with sensitive information are commonly required to sign a statement to the effect that they agree to abide by the
restrictions of the Official Secrets Act.
The Act looks into information that could affect National Security.
A recent example of how this was put into action in the media was the Metropolitan Police demanding that the sources were
handed in by the Guardian.
Back when reporters Amelia Hill and Nick Davies revealed the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone there has been an investigation
and now information is being told to be handed over.
The Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, said on Friday: "We shall resist this extraordinary demand to the utmost".
Our general secretary here at the NUJ, Michelle Stanistreet, said: "This is a very serious threat to journalists and the NUJ will fight
off this vicious attempt to use the Official Secrets Act … Journalists have investigated the hacking story and told the truth to the
public. They should be congratulated rather than being hounded and criminalised by the state.
"The protection of sources is an essential principle which has been
repeatedly reaffirmed by the European court of human rights as the
cornerstone of press freedom.
The NUJ shall defend it. In 2007 a judge made it clear that journalists
and their sources are protected under article 10 of the Human Rights
Act and it applies to leaked material. The use of the Official Secrets
Act is a disgraceful attempt to get round this existing judgment.”
The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) is an integral part of the British
constitution.
It impacts on many areas of law in the UK and on the actions of all
public bodies. It provides for greater openness and transparency in
government decision- making and acts as a crucial check on
executive power.

Ethical
Codes of Practice such as the NUJ and Editors are put in place to give guidelines for journalists.
The idea behind the codes are that journalists know what to write and how to go about doing so. They are
also there for a place to check your work and make sure you know terminology is Ethically correct.
If a person feels that the rules have been broken in these codes and a piece of writing or imagery has
caused offense then there is an organisation put in place to deal with complaints.
This was where the Press Complaints Commission first established itself.
The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) was a voluntary regulatory body for British printed newspapers
and magazines, consisting of representatives of the major publishers.
PCC was closed earlier this year and has now been replaced by IPSO-
Independent Press Standards Organisation.
IPSO have been put in place to deal with complaints and look into
harassment by the media. They makes sure the Editors Code of
Practice is followed.
(If you are experiencing problems with unwanted attention or
harassment by journalists, or if you are concerned that a publication
intends to publish information that you believe breaches the Editors'
Code, IPSO may be able to assist.
We offer practical advice and support and act pre-publication to ensure
that relevant newspapers or magazines are alerted to your concerns
where necessary. Our team is available 24hrs a day to provide
emergency support.)

Editors Code of Practice
The Sixteen areas surrounding this Code are: (*Public Interest could be argued for in relation to this.)
Accuracy-The press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information.
Opportunity to reply- A fair opportunity for reply to inaccuracies must be given when reasonably called for.
*Privacy- Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence.
*Harassment- Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit. They must stop
when asked
Intrusion in to shock or grief- Approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion. Publication handled
sensitively.
*Children- Young people should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary intrusion.
*Children in sex cases- The press must not identify children under 16 who are victims or witnesses in cases of
sex offences.
*Hospitals- Journalists must identify themselves and obtain permission from a responsible executive before
entering.
*Reporting of crime-Relativesor friends of persons convicted or accused of crime should not generally be
Identified without their consent unless they are genuinely relevant to the story.
*Clandestine devices and subterfuge- The press must not seek to obtain or publish material acquired by using
hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices.
Victims of sexual assault- The press must not identify victims of sexual assault.
Discrimination- The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative references.
Financial journalism- Journalists must not use for their own profit financial information they receive in advance of
its general publication.
Confidential sources- Journalists have a moral obligation to protect confidential sources of information.
Witness payments in criminal trials- No payment or offer of payment to a witness
*Payment to criminals- Payment or offers of payment for stories, pictures or information, which seek to exploit a
particular crime or to glorify or glamorise crime in general, must not be made.
All members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this
preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the
rights of the individual and the public's right to know.

Comparing with the NUJ codes
Privacy- Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private life without consent. It is
unacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their consent.
NUJ explains privacy in their code of conduct. Seen in the image below. You should not intrude into
anybody’s private life, grief or distress. This also covers Intrusion and Harassment
They must not persist in questioning, telephoning, pursuing or photographing individuals once asked to
desist; nor remain on their property when asked to leave and must not follow them. If requested, they
must identify themselves and whom they represent.
Children- A journalist shall normally seek the consent of
an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a
child for a story about her/his welfare.
Discrimination- Produces no material likely to lead to
hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age,
gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital
status, or sexual orientation.
Clandestine devices and subterfuge- Obtains material by
honest, straightforward and open means, with the
exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in
the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot
be obtained by straightforward means.

What is The Public Interest? Random House Dictionary defines Public interest as:
1. The welfare or well-being of the general public.
2. Appeal or relevance to the general populace: a news story of public interest
Before the PCC closed they had the public interest on the foot of the Editors Code of Practice. Here, the
image below explains this.
There is not an exact list of what will be public interest and it is down to the journalists and codes of
practice to try understand.
It is important not to resort to ‘It was
in the public interest’ each time a
complaint is made or there are
issues over how you have gathered
information or not followed the
guidelines set.
The Code of Practice is put in place
to follow and look at when unsure
over a piece of work.
You cannot justify wrong doing by
calling your action in the public
interest when it is not.

Extension Tasks
Question 1) I believe it is wrong. I believe information must be brought about through the right way and the right way only. Setting up
investigations, trapping people or pretending to be someone else to squeeze out information is very sly. Finding out information is what
people working in media do. However, there needs to be a right way otherwise it will happen all to frequently.
The example about the two DJ’s phoning a hospital where the Duchess of Cambridge had been staying; pretending to be the Queen and
Prince Charles to find out information is appropriate here.
An unsuspecting nurse told the DJ’s from 2Day FM that the Duchess was having an ‘uneventful’ night and went on to make a number of
deeply personal observations about her health.
The woman told them that the Duchess was about to be 'freshened up', saying: ‘She's sleeping at the moment and she has had an
uneventful night. It is clear that the action was a joke and a prank however; information such as this should not be released.
Phoning up a nurse is one way of getting information. Another in relation to a phone is the hacking that was heavily documented in the
media.
Is this a right way of getting information? Do the public need to know about celebrities private lives or other information found out. The
Milly Dowler case is something that can apply to this. Amanda Jane "Milly" Dowler was a 13-year-old English girl who was abducted on her
way home from school.
This played a big part in the ‘News of the World Scandal’ It was revealed in 2011 that News of the World reporters had accessed her
voicemail while she was reported missing.
The resulting outcry from the British public contributed to the closure of the newspaper and led to a range of investigations and inquiries
into phone hacking and media ethics in British media.
In my opinion this should not happen, nor should any other form of receiving information that is not available to you. This caused and is still
causing more distress to the family of Milly Dowler, just as the nurse revealing information about the Duchess of Cambridge caused much
anger.
The media has a duty to the public to provide honest, fair and accurate information, however, the ethics of getting that information should
not have to be questioned, which they were.
Journalists should not be allowed to use methods that may cross a certain ethical line. On the other hand, it is clear why many do. It is a
race to get a story out and many papers are desperate to be first.

Hiring private investigators is the same as you getting the information. Glenn Mulcaire was paid £100,000 a year by the News of the World.
He would be "tasked" to target a particular mobile phone number to acquire voicemails and report back to the news desk.
NUJ code of conduct number 5: A journalist obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both
overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means.
In August 2012, the Met, using documents obtained from raiding Mulcaire's office, had identified 4,744 potential victims of phone hacking by News of the World. The
National Union of Journalists’ code of conduct explains that it must be honest and straightforward in getting information. Hiring someone to investigate and obtain
information is wrong.
Are ‘stings’ a relevant journalistic technique? The guardian recently produced an article on this. It is not regarded as legitimate to go fishing in the hope of catching
someone.
During the leveson inquiry there were many references to journalist “dark arts”. This is a good phrase because it clearly explains how people overuse their power. ‘Stings’
can be used on many people from, celebrities to politicians. The idea is to tempt them with something illegal or news worthy and then write the story about them.
A good example to support this comes from Tulisa and the ‘Fake Sheikh’. Tulisa Contostavlos is planning to sue the Sun on Sunday's reporter Mazher Mahmood. It
follows the collapse of the trial against the singer in which she was accused of arranging a drugs deal.
The Observer columnist, Barbara Ellen, sees Mahmood's entrapment of Contostavlos as "a nasty case of 'get the uppity chav'".
She argues that the reporter "was shooting fish in a barrel". This is a phrase used for many sting operations. Is it right to do such a thing?
I believe it isn’t and the judge who dismissed Mahmood’s claims supports me. I feel that information should come about through an honest way. You cannot start to
make exceptions or excuses. Journalism must be done correctly.
The BBC release states: "They allege that the fake sheikh was the real crook, using sophisticated entrapment and even creating crimes and fabricating evidence." You
making the news before handing it over to be reported are something that no journalist should be looking to do.
NUJ code 6- does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest. NUJ code 8- resists
threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his
duties before the information is public knowledge. Both of these codes support my reasoning and belief that this is wrong.
To conclude, having seen a variety of different methods, some just as soft as an attempted prank call to a hospital on the off chance a nurse leaks something, to setting
up your own news, it is clear that it should not be allowed.
In any form, if it is not providing the public with information they NEED to know then it should not be done. Many journalists use this as their shield in most work,
however everyone should know the clear ethics behind getting information and where the line is.
You can see why people do it. The ‘Fake Sheikh’ was out to expose celebrities and sportspeople who are tempted by the offers he puts on the table, however it is not a
correct way of going about getting information. I feel journalists should keep to the NUJ codes of conduct and gather information in the RIGHT way.

Question 2) I feel we cannot always trust what we read. We need to understand the agendas newspapers hold when producing
their stories. Many hold, political biases that can make the most ordinary situations and manipulate them to suit their beliefs.
An example comes from 23 years ago. The Hillsborough Disaster that led to 96 Liverpool football fans dying in a stadium. The Sun
newspaper produced a font page spread that told some horrible fabrications over the real happenings. The cover up over the
actual truth is something that many find unacceptable to this day.
Mr. Mohan, the current editor, added: ''Twenty-three years ago The Sun newspaper made a terrible mistake. We published an
inaccurate and offensive story about the events at Hillsborough. We said it was the truth - it wasn't.
Is apologising enough? Having a large headline saying ‘The Truth’ was
something that you cannot come back from. This is one of the reasons the
paper does not hold credibility within the media industry.
The apology was rejected by Trevor Hicks, of the Hillsborough Families Support
Group, who said it was "too little, too late" and calling him "lowlife, clever
lowlife, but lowlife".
It is from this that people should not trust what they read, even if the headline
says ‘The Truth’.
Another example from The Sun is in relation to yet another false story. The Sun issued an apology to Mr. Peter Duffy, Consultant
Urologist, University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust.
This is following an article that appeared on the Sun Online on 19 January 2011, titled "testicle removed in cancer bungle.” The
apology states that: “We did not intend to suggest by our headline or our interpretation of events that Mr. Duffy had negligently
carried out his duties as the Consultant involved.
“The GMC has since ruled "beyond doubt" that Mr. Duffy behaved professionally and appropriately to the required standards at
all times. “We apologise to Mr. Duffy for any embarrassment.” Yet another example why you should not believe what you read
as the truth is very far from what is printed in many newspapers.

If a paper has a political bias should they be able to produce an accurate and objective story? People should not trust what they read in
certain newspapers.
Often, people buy a newspaper so they can support their own views and values and convince themselves that the bias in that newspaper
supports with what they believe. If a newspaper holds a blatant political bias, can it be accurate?
In terms of offering a balanced view to the public for them to make their own minds up, no. If it can offer facts and figures that support what
they produce, then this is as accurate as it can be. It comes to what people believe and what they want to believe.
The Sun using the front pages to express their changing views is a good example
in relation to political bias.
This can show the huge influence the paper has on the readers. Can a paper
such as this have accuracy and be objective? The change in political views
illustrates the need to think for yourself and not to take too much into what the
papers produce.
In this example, Sunday Express is very
much a right wing newspaper and has
in the past supported UKIP.
Many more people support their
strong view against who enters the
country and how the country is run
now. Can you trust a paper that has a
political bias towards UKIP?
This is a great example to look at hen concerning how false news stories should be
corrected.
Many people argue that the correction should be as big as the story itself. This could
encourage mistakes to be eradicated and for articles to be much more accurate.
In this example, it was argued that the small piece of text for the correction was not good enough with the original story being very large. However, the Sunday Express
argued that when they joined ipso, they explained to them that corrections would be in the letters page. “While the committee welcomed the newspaper’s prompt
recognition of the inaccuracy, the publication of the original claim nevertheless demonstrated a failure to take care not to publish distorted information” In this, the
paper was made to reprint an apology, but larger. Should they all have to be large?
I feel this would be a good idea, it would make sure the stories are so much truthful, perhaps this could go a long way to making newspapers much more credible in the
future.

Question 3: The media can alter out opinions greatly. The way many newspapers, particularly right wing talk about certain groups of people
can make the less educated or culturally unaware think what they are told to think.
Newspapers, such as the Sun produce articles to relate to their own agenda. An example of media that can make people feel differently to
others can come in the form of Katie Hopkins. Hopkins is one of The Sun’s weekly columnists and former reality TV contestant on The
Apprentice and I’m a Celebrity Get Me out of Here.
She holds some very strong views and this was shown in her migrant 'cockroaches' column. In a strongly worded statement issued on Friday,
the UN High Commission for Human Rights said tabloid “misinformation” about immigration was fed into a “nasty underbelly of racism”
lurking beneath the migration issue. From this it is clear that the articles she produces are not liked by many and rightly so, however she does
have an affect on the media and the public. There are large amounts of people that agree with her thoughts and her heavy following on
twitter supports this.
The Commissioner argued that “anti-foreigner abuse” in the press was impacting public opinion and distorting the EU's response to the
Mediterranean crisis - and possibly increasing the death toll.
This idea of “Impacting public opinion” is good to explore because this should not be happening. It is from this that it brings us to the idea
brought up many times which is should NUJ guidelines apply to all journalists? If this were to happen the example of Katie Hopkins and her
racial hate would be eradicated.
Code of conduct number 9- produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race,
colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation. This would be a good way to stop the public being fed information
that is from opinion only rather than fact.
This would risk freedom of expression, but if journalists abuse that power then it is something that must be looked at. Journalists should
offer an accurate study of news stories, they should not allow personal opinion or that of the paper influence what is being put on paper and
what the buyer is reading.
The NUJ guidelines offer something to keep writing fair and balanced. If everyone were to follow the guidelines and code of conduct, there
would be less bad media influence. This Katie Hopkins example in relation to “anti-foreigner abuse” is a good point to look into. Is this just
freedom of expression or is it an abuse of power?
Is this actually needed in papers? Something that influences the readers in a negative way should be put to an end. This is because it is clear
they have a huge influence over people.
Producing wrong or inaccurate articles may be allowing expression, however it is putting this opinion in the public’s beliefs.

Writing copy resubmission!

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Writing copy resubmission!

Similar to Writing copy resubmission! (12)

More from AlanSmith96

More from AlanSmith96 (20)

Writing copy resubmission!

Editor's Notes