Monday, 10 August 2015
TWITTER Beckham ignores IPSO over Mail kids intrusion
(lord) John Prescott did it, forcing the Sunday Times to quickly withdraw an inaccurate story.
David Beckham is taking the same approach, but will the mighty Mail bow to social media pressure...
The PCC and now IPSO face being ignored by those powerful enough to have a social media, especially Twitter, presence sufficient to impact on public opinion.
The Mail, the most complained about paper of all, not only ran pictures of Beckham's 4 year-old daughter, contravening the Editors' Code, they also criticised their parenting.
Now this is the same paper that rages and fulminates against the nanny state itself turning (ninny) nanny, a similar state of hypocrisy and cant to its endless moral panics over sexual content in broadcast and other media ... which it gleefully, salaciously features in large, multiple pictures (not forgetting it's notorious sidebar of shame).
Obviously as the Beckham girl is an elected official with an important influence on our democracy ... Hmmm. Okay, so the legal public interest defence is out, unless you re-heat the fatuous line Murdoch has used for decades (if the public chooses to buy papers with this content, they're interested and the market should cater for them), and Richard Desmond trotted out at his cringeworthy Leveson appearance ("ethics?").
The Editors' Code, as the Mail will know, doesn't provide a public interest exemption for the children clauses.
Sterling work from the Mail then. Beckham would have a good case if he took it up with IPSO, but tweeted instead. Neither the Mail nor press self-regulation come out of this looking good.