A lot has been said about the News of the World debacle. Although during the discussion some very important angles of the situation have been too widely ignored. Sure. I’d concede that they may have committed “a few” illegal acts (possibly over 4,000) but in the rush to dish in on the righteous outrage\juicy gossip, I feel that we’ve forgotten about the real victim here: freedom. Both freedom to and freedom from.
I’m talking about the freedom of journalists to report matters of public interest, such as whether the parents of missing children are worried, or if people feel sad when their loved ones die in terrorist attacks. Possibly the sudden rise in anti-freedom of the press sentiment is a backlash of the post-wikileaks era. A paranoia brought on by the uncertain legal world of electronic communication.
To those bearing such sentiment I would demand that they think back to the good old days of reporting when, with police approval, members of the tabloid press would have to break into the homes of victim’s families and rifle through drawers for letters, study the placement of family portraits and smell pillows in case some salty residue might betray a mother crying herself to sleep the previous night. That was real journalism; a vast array of maverick semi-private investigators funded by advertisers and people who like to read slosh over toast. In this case, journalism is just another facet of life being made easier by emerging technology.
This brings me to the other side of the magnanimous coin of liberty; freedom from. I’m quite certain you’d agree that many people suffering personal tragedy don’t want to be hounded by more than 60 million people they don’t know to explain all the details. Surely then it’s better that these people are left alone whilst we pay someone to illegally access their personal information and relay it to us in print. Done properly this will be accompanied by a pixelated photo of them taken from behind a hedge.
Much like Kenneth Clarke’s proposal to reduce rape charges for an early plea of guilty; we cut out the suffering of the victims by cutting down on all the other troublesome parts of the equation that cause them to be actively involved in the legal procedures concerning them and the tribulations they have endured.
Laws, much like anything else, are a matter of balance. If you’re willing to break the law and risk prison to find out whether a pop singer is happy with her new boyfriend then by all means you’ve clearly earned that private information and should be supported. If you’re caught in the act you will even have access to legal aid.
This can only be right; legal or otherwise, you need help.