Steven Price

My book

Media Minefield


Guide to NZ Media Law

Official Information Act

Official Information Act


Bill of Rights Act

Media law resources

Feeds (RSS)


« | Main | »

Memo to HOS: When a man is accused of dismembering his former partner, don’t pap their 5-year-old kid

By Steven | December 22, 2010

Yes, even if he may be an important witness. Especially if he may be an important witness.

Even if┬áhe’s in a public place.

Even if a different picture of the boy and his mum was supplied by the police. (Memo to the police: What the hell were you thinking?)

Also, don’t try to justify this sort of shoddy behaviour by pretending that publishing the photograph was in the public interest. If you are tempted to do so, then first make sure you can convincingly complete the following sentence: publishing a photograph of this 5 year-old child on his way to school, at a time when his father is suspected of chopping up his mother, will help the public by….

No fewer than nine people complained to the Press Council about the Herald on Sunday’s decision to run a picture of the son of Carmen Thomas. The Press Council wasn’t convinced by HOS’s claim that there was public interest in it, or that it didn’t invade his privacy because it was in a public place or because the police had already given them another photo. They called the publication “gratuitous.” Too right.

Topics: Press Council | No Comments »

Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.