An invasion of privacy or just freedom of press?

The story dominating headlines all around the world last week was about the naked pictures of Prince Harry that emerged from a recent trip to Las Vegas. Whilst in the beginning the story was about whether or not people agreed with what Harry was doing, it quickly changed direction on Friday when the pictures we were all talking about were printed in The Sun. The debate is now about whether this is an invasion of the Prince’s privacy or just the freedom of the press to print what they believe is in the public’s interest.

The argument about what is in the public’s interest and what is in the interest of the public has been ongoing for many years with the decision ultimatley coming down to each individual’s morals and beliefs.  Is it really in the public’s interest for a newspaper to print such images?  Or do they have an ulterior motive because they think that by being the first paper to print them they will make a great deal of money?

David Dinsmore, managing editor of The Sun, has defended his decision to print the pictures and believes that if we have all been able to freely access the pictures online then why should they not be printed in a newspaper. In my opinion, when the pictures were made available online people could choose whether they looked at them or not, printing them on the front page of one of the most popular tabloid newspapers means people no longer have that choice.

Currently, we are awaiting the results of the Leveson enquiry into media ethics and how the press should be regulated going forward. It will be interesting to see how these results affects images like this being published in future. The fact that only one newspaper has printed these pictures already shows the impact the Leveson enquiry is having.

Some may think the press are looking at what really is in the interest of the public and choosing what content they publish so that it is relevant and interesting to their readers. Others will say this shows that the enquiry is scaring organisations into not publishing content because of their fear of what consequences they might face; ultimately, leading to press that does not work in the interest of the public.

Going forward it will be interesting to see whether any other newspapers print these images or any other images that may appear. It will also be interesting to see how the Press Complaints Commission reacts to the situation. Someone once said “it takes a lifetime to build a reputation and a second to ruin it”, I wonder what impact these pictures have on the reputation of the Royal Family and in particular, the reputation Harry has worked hard on building in the past few years.

What do you think? By printing these pictures, has the newspaper invaded Harry’s privacy? Or is it in our interest to see them?


PR for Geordies…

On Tuesday night, the people of the North East braced themselves for the first episode of Geordie Shore and after watching it I don’t think many Geordies will be happy about the perception of Newcastle it gave out.

From a PR perspective, if the idea of the show was to make people from the North East proud of their roots, to put Newcastle on the map as great city and to increase the level of tourism to the city then after watching the first episode many would say it has failed miserably.

After watching shows like The Only Way is Essex and Made in Chelsea, I knew the city was never going to be shown in its best light, yet I never expected the whole episode to be full of out-of-date stereotypes of what the people of Newcastle are supposedly like.

According to one of the cast ‘ you’re not a proper Geordie unless you’ve got a tan’ yet walk up Northumberland Street on a busy Saturday afternoon and I’m sure you’ll see many people who don’t.

Hopefully, in the next few episodes we’ll see a real representation of Newcastle, but after watching the first episode I’m not so sure. Lets just hope for the sake of all the real Geordies, that the programme hasn’t ruined the good reputation the city has worked hard to build!