PCC and privacy

The Press Complaints Council has today release a new adjudication, upholding a complaint against OK! magazine for invading the privacy of a woman attending an AA meeting.
The article concerned a male celebrity attending an AA meeting with a friend - the complainant.
The article published information the complainant felt was private about her addiction and treatment. It also published a picture of her.
The adjudication is interesting for two reasons. First, the magazine made no attempt to suggest that this publication was in the public interest. Second that the magazine made no attempt to disguise the identity of the complainant even though the story was about the celebrity.
The story raises the age old issue of whether celebrities deserve less protection than ordinary people merely because of their celebrity. According to the Appeal Courts McKennitt verdict, it would depend upon the celebrity and the lengths they had gone to previously to protect their privacy. So, if we accept that there is a difference between celebrities and non-celebrities, and take into account this new adjudication, journalists would be well advised to prevent non-celebrities in circumstances such as these being identifiable and concentrate their stories on the celebrity - or find a good public interest defence.