The News of the World splashed yesterday on the story of David Beckham's sister being on benefits. This intrusive story goes into details of her personal circumstances including the fact that she was out of work and allegations that her new boyfriend was violent.
The sole reason for this story seems to be that she is the sister of one of the UK's best known footballers and it is on this basis that the editor of the News of the World will have to defend any complaint the family may bring.
The PCC's code says that everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home and health and that editors will be expected to justify intrusion. This justification would be based in the public interest which the PCC identifies as being identifying or exposing wrongdoing; protecting public health; and preventing the public from being misled.
None of these seem to apply here as a justifaction for publication with the story being run to inform the reader of Beckham's sister's private life; her employment status, the benefits she was claiming, facts about the support her brother had given her and her relationship with a man that the NoW identifies as being a violent criminal.
The NoW claims to support freedom of the press, yet constantly puts its continuance and public support at risk by its determination to run stories that have no public interest despite being of interest to the public. The public generally understands that the famous may have to put up with considerable intrusion into their private lives as the price of their fame, but the general feeling is that their relatives (and other non-famous, private citizens) deserve more protection. It is stories such as these, printed purely for profit without regard for the damage done to the subject of the story, that may eventually lead to damaging restrictions being introduced on the media. Unless papers such as NoW can be persuaded to take their responsibilities seriously we may lose our tradional free press. It is its failure to seriously censure papers such as the NoW for stories such as these that has brought such criticism to the PCC. Why would the Beckham's complain about this story when the only redress the PCC can offer is a finding that it breaches the code and simply reminds everyone about the intrusion?
The PCC will continue to be largely irrelevant until it takes its duty to uphold standards seriously and penalises those newspapers that would breach them with penalties that are meaningful.