主播大秀

The series set out in some detail the at times complex and intricate links between Mr Murdoch and senior politicians, and in the ECU鈥檚 view did so largely on a factual basis. Where statements were made about the power of the press, they did not go beyond聽 statements about which there could be little dispute. Some contributors did express concern about the nature of Mr Murdoch鈥檚 influence, but it was a matter of personal opinion, which individual contributors were entitled to express, and not a basis for inferring an editorial line on the part of the programme-makers. Without a direct contribution from a member of the Murdoch family, the requirement for due impartiality was met by the inclusion of the on-the-record opinions of Mr Murdoch senior and interviews with, among others, a one-time Executive Editor of The News of the World and a former senior lieutenant to Mr Murdoch.

In chronicling the rise of the Murdoch dynasty, the programme was not obliged to offer an account of all Mr Murdoch鈥檚 business interests and, inasmuch as it examined his commercial success, it did so only to the extent that it was relevant to the story it told about the Murdoch family. In the ECU鈥檚 view the Guidelines would not require arguments related to other issues to be reflected in a programme explicitly about something else. The programme-makers chose to focus on the political rather than the business acumen of Mr Murdoch, interwoven with an account of his family鈥檚 involvement in the company, as the Guidelines permit.

In relation to the specific criticism levelled against the series, the programme set out the events leading up to the closure of The News of The World and the establishment of the Leveson Inquiry. It did not purport to be a detailed examination of Max Mosley鈥檚 court case against the newspaper, nor an analysis of the campaign by Hacked Off to place press regulation on a statutory footing. The fact that those involved in what was termed 鈥渢he rebel alliance鈥� were united in their dislike of Mr Murdoch and the conduct of some of his newspapers was clear from their individual contributions and required no further elaboration. Their presence in the programme helped tell viewers a story which included an explanation for the source of the funding for their campaign and the personal motives for their involvement.聽 The 主播大秀 Editorial Guidelines are not intended to prevent groups from setting out their campaign objectives; they are only concerned with ensuring the 主播大秀 does not uncritically align itself with their aims. But the programme did not directly involve itself with issues arising from Hacked Off鈥檚 campaign for greater press regulation. And to the extent that this could be deduced from the hostility of some of the contributors towards Mr Murdoch, it was in the ECU鈥檚 view, properly counterbalanced by remarks from other contributors, which cast doubt on the motives of those involved in the campaign.

The ECU also considered the criticism of the programme鈥檚 treatment of the hacking of Milly Dowler鈥檚 phone. The ECU accepted that it is now agreed that the false hope described by Milly Dowler鈥檚 mother in her testimony to the Leveson inquiry, and repeated in the series, was in all probability not the fault of the private investigator who hacked Milly Dowler鈥檚 phone. Judge Leveson and The Guardian subsequently accepted it was likely that the messages were automatically deleted by the mobile phone company鈥檚 system. And although the programme made no reference to the original supposition that the messages had been deleted by a journalist acting for The News of the World, in the ECU鈥檚 opinion viewers might nevertheless have inferred that the newspaper was responsible for giving Milly Dowler鈥檚 parents the impression she might still be alive, and that inference would probably have been incorrect.聽 However, Lord Leveson concluded that the essence of The Guardian story 鈥� namely that Milly Dowler鈥檚 phone was hacked by or on the instructions of journalists employed by The News of the World 鈥� was correct. So while it would have been better if the programme had guarded against an incorrect inference in this respect, the ECU did not think it would have affected the audience鈥檚 understanding of what The News of the World was guilty of so materially as to amount to a breach of the 主播大秀鈥檚 editorial standards.

The final substantive point the ECU considered related to the claim that viewers were misled into believing that the exposure of the private lives of a series of Conservative MPs was the result of a political agenda, linked to The Sun鈥檚 switch to supporting Labour in the 1997 General Election. The sequence, included in the 14 July broadcast, involved testimony from a former Deputy Editor of The Sun and a former reporter from The News of the World, separated by a montage of front pages from both newspapers showing expos茅s of Conservative MPs during the Major government of 1992-7. The ECU accepted the programme-makers did not intend viewers to understand this montage as relating only to the run-up to the 1997 election (in the context of a programme where events were not dealt with sequentially), but envisaged that section of the sequence as illustrating a more general point about the power tabloid newspapers have to expose MP鈥檚 private lives.聽 In the ECU鈥檚 view, however, the juxtaposition in time in this case did not work as clearly as in other parts of the programme.聽 As a result, it would not have been apparent to viewers that the montage related to events which largely predated The Sun鈥檚 increasing warmth towards and declaration of support for Labour.聽 Similarly it would not have been apparent that the former reporter鈥檚 comments, in which he spoke of a policy of targeting Conservative MPs, also related to a period which began well before The Sun鈥檚 support for Labour in the 1997 General Election.聽 The sequence may therefore have given the misleading impression that Conservative MPs had been targeted as a result of Mr Murdoch's decision to support Labour in the 1997 election.聽聽For these reasons the ECU judged that the sequence, though it formed only a small part of聽 the picture developed over three hours of programming, fell below the 主播大秀鈥檚 standards of due accuracy in such a context.

Partly upheld