The press have an important job and that is to relay information from a newsroom to the general public. This process requires a lot of work from various people, reporters, researchers and journalists. So someone who is working to relay information must ensure they relay information ethically and truthfully. The line between ethics and press has always been blurred, as a general rule the print press tend to get more freedom of speech than the broadcasting press which is monitored more heavily by the government. However, sometimes the freedom the press have can run away from them and we end up with unethical stories being published to the world.

 

A key example of unethical press is easily linked to The News of The World (NoTW) phone hacking scandal, where we saw the paper come under scrutiny when it was discovered that journalists had been hacking phones of celebrities. Yet, according to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) as a member of the press you can be slightly unethical if it is in the public interest, and for many newspapers celebrities news sells well. The line was drawn on the phone hacking scandal when teenagers Millie Dowler's voicemails were hacked therefore intruding on a police investigation. Following from the police investigation led to where we are now, with no NoTW. So were the journalists ethically correct or where they too far? No one seemed very bothered when they were hacking celebrities phones but when it came to a 'normal' human being every went crazy.

 

Is it that they are celebrities the press feel they deserve it and think they can get away with anything? Is it because they put themselves in the limelight that we find it acceptable to nose into their lives and sting them. It's not just typical Hollywood-esque celebrities but also Member of Parliament who can get stung. Recently The Sunday Mirror stung MP Brooks Newmark by using a freelance journalist to pose as 'Sophie' a 20 something PR girl for the Tories.

 

According to The Times and Buzzfeed the freelancer didn't intend on entrapping Newmark originally but tried to entice MPs over Twitter and Newmark was the first to bite. To begin with the pair talked over private message on Twitter before eventually exchanging phone numbers. Using social media app Whatsapp the pair started to exchange photographs gradually becoming more x-rated. The undercover freelancer who has remained anonymous used photographs from various Twitter accounts to entrap the MP.

 

The freelancer was accused of engaging in a 'fishing expedition' to entrap the MP, however the PCC claim paper can employ subertfuge when the story have public justification which the Editor-in-Chief of The Sunday Mirror said it was. Due to recent claims MPs have been using social media to get women the Senior executives felt the story had public justification.

 

Due to this story coming out the MP has now stepped down from his position, therefore the press have led a man to loose his job. As a result, does this prove the story is ethical or unethical? It's definitely a grey area, however as stated by the PCC if it has public interest it can be published, however, there is always a worry this will open up a wide problem across the board with regards to the press and them having too much freedom.