The hallmark of sensationalist tabloid reporting is generating fear and outrage, invariably in defence of deeply partisan, reactionary politics. Campaigners who use direct action and civil disobedience tactics are often seen as a target for this kind of “journalism”. In particular, reporters have turned up at meetings or attended online discussions looking for gossip and to write melodramatic stories – and have subsequently handed incriminating material on groups and individuals over to the police.
Tabloid reporters are little different, in terms of risk, to police or private security. They are very happy to take you to the pub and buy drinks to get people talking. However, for the most part they do not have the same training or resources. Usually they are looking for a quick story, which means their cover is more likely to fall apart, their grasp of your politics is poor and they are too eager to ask inappropriate questions or seek personal details.
There are supposedly rules about reporters’ conduct and about campaigners’ expectations of their privacy. For example, the Society of Editors Code of Practice says “the press must not seek to obtain or publish material acquired by using hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices” and adds that “engaging in misrepresentation or subterfuge, including by agents or intermediaries, can generally be justified only in the public interest and then only when the material cannot be obtained by other means”.
The National Union of Journalists Code of Conduct also says its members are expected to obtain 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”.
The problem is that tabloid journalists have a long track record of deciding that “overwhelmingly” in the public interest means whatever they want it to mean.
One justification for using subterfuge is “detecting or exposing crime” – given as the explanation for recent infiltration into climate action and animal rights events, with reporters subsequently handing material over to the police.
Some actions to consider:
Use Netpol’s advice on managing risks to make a plan for any event where tabloid reporters may attempt to attend to gather information they can use to undermine your group.
At a public event, it is always worth asking if there are any journalists present and if so, what media organisation they represent. There is no guarantee they will comply, but it does force them to later justify covert reporting based on a public interest justification.
If you are holding a private event that covers, for instance, strategies and discussions, you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. However, unless organisers know everyone attending personally – unlikely, for example, at a training event – they should consider taking extra care not only with the information they share, but also any attributable statements made by named speakers.
Failure to do so can have serious consequences – as when five Just Stop Oil protesters were collectively sentenced to 21 years in prison for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. The prosecution evidence that convicted them was an action-planning zoom call covertly recorded by a Sun reporter.
It is worth explicitly reminding participants of this too, particularly about making comments that are potentially incriminating. If you are holding an event online, you can also suggest that participants change their screen names to first names only or an alias.
You can always inform attendees at events that any suspected intrusions or other illegality committed by undercover reporters will be reported to the Press Justice Project, a charity who will advise on and support legal action where appropriate. This might warn off reporters considering acting unlawfully.
If a tabloid tells you it is planning to publish an exposé on your group, the tabloid’s reporter should give you reasonable time to respond. Don’t talk to them in person or over the phone, but ask them to email a copy of their story and a list of questions, so that you can decide whether it is worth responding to whatever it is they want you to comment on.
If a reporter refuses to say who they work for, they are probably looking to pitch a sensational story to a tabloid and there is little value in engaging with them.
If individuals are targeted by a tabloid story, they should try to stay calm and avoid feeling goaded into responding or overreacting, no matter how tempting this is. Remember you do not need to answer questions.
Tabloid reporters often trawl through social media accounts looking for photos or statements indicating an individual’s alleged “hypocrisy”, or simply to illustrate their story. Everyone involved in campaigns liable for targeting by tabloids should proactively take steps to protect their online presence, with strong privacy settings and caution about sharing personal information publicly.
If you are targeted in a way that feels like harassment or deliberate misinformation, tell Hacked Off about your experiences, who can advise on further actions.
Download this video to share on your own channels
Leave a Reply