One of the biggest scandals to hit British politics and media occurred about a week or so ago when Tory MP Brooks Newmark was forced to resign in connection to a sexting incident with whom he thought was a young Tory supporter named Sophie Wittams, who turned out to be an undercover investigative journalist who was freelancing for The Mirror.
In the run-up to the Conservative Party Conference last week, Mr. Newmark’s inappropriate behaviour came to light in an article published in The Mirror just as the conference was beginning. Of course, it was timed to coincide with the start of the Birmingham event.
What makes this case even more intriguing is that, most likely, the Independent Press Standards Organisation will surely be called in to investigate. Ipso was formed in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry into the Phone Hacking Scandal that led to the demise of News of the World and the previous print journalism governing body, the Press Complaints Commission.
Mr. Newmark’s defenders say the MP was the victim of a fishing expedition by the journalist. Opponents may believe that it was mission accomplished when you consider Mr. Newmark’s position within the Tory Party.
Mr. Newmark was the party’s person in charge of encouraging more women to take up politics. Therefore, for the head of that campaign to get caught in a sexting scandal would be as if his opponents struck gold. Ipso also governs the print industry by the Editors’ Code of Practice that was used by the PCC. The code lays out incidents in which the media should not engage in unethical behaviour as well as incidents where it may be necessary to use subterfuge or other methods in order to get the story if it is in the public interest. According to the Code, 1. The public interest includes, but is not confined to:
i) Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety.
ii) Protecting public health and safety.
iii) Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation.Now Mr. Newmark’s actions while immoral, are not considered criminal. The incident does not impose on the public’s health or safety. But when we examine the third point, the media may have a point.While we have not heard from neither the journalist nor The Mirror, there are many questions as to their motivation for pursuing this avenue for a story. To me, the No. 1 question is were they tipped off about something? Did someone say, “off the record, there may be some Tory MPs who are acting in an inappropriate manner toward young women”?
While we have not heard from the media’s side, many on the other side have published their speculations. Barrister Matthew Scott makes a case that the journalist’s actions borders on serious criminal behaviour, He claims Newmark’s coercion is tantamount to sexual assault.
“Causing a person to engage in a sexual activity without consent is a far more serious offence,” he wrote. “In fact we know that the law regards it as about five times more serious than phone hacking, because it carries a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment (or even life imprisonment if the activity caused involves penetrative sex). Anyone convicted must also sign the sex offenders register.”
The Guardian published an article that the MP may have a case.
“Incidentally, when the Daily Telegraph‘s journalists pretended in 2011 to be the constituents of Lib-Dem MPs, the paper did have prior knowledge of their private statements. And yet the paper was adjudged “guilty” of engaging in a fishing expedition, thereby breaching clause 10 of the editors’ code of practice.”
This will be Ipso’s first big test since its formation in April. It will be cause for debate in the coming months.
Life 2.0 