Here's an interesting contrast. Compare the definition of public interest in the editors' code of practice - the one administered by the Press Complaints Commission - with the definition in the National Union of Journalists' code of conduct. The former (let's call it the PCC version) says: "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.
But the NUJ's version is longer and reads: The public interest includes: a) Detecting or exposing crime or a serious misdemeanour; b) Protecting public health and safety; c) Preventing the public from being misled by some statement or action of an individual or organisation; d) Exposing misuse of public funds or other forms of corruption by public bodies;
e) Revealing potential conflicts of interest by those in positions of power and influence; f) Exposing corporate greed; g) Exposing hypocritical behaviour by those holding high office.
Oddly, though, editors often use the clauses contained in the NUJ version to justify what they publish. So is one better than another? Would the PCC version be improved by including the extra clauses from the NUJ version?
