Resolution Statement Complaint 04660-16 A Man v Daily Mirror

Resolution Statement Complaint 04660-16 A Man v Daily Mirror

Summary of Complaint 

1.    A man complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the Daily Mirror breached Clause 2 (Privacy) and Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Inside Swingfields sex festival where 700 horny guests enjoyed weekend of debauchery in quiet Welsh village”, published on 4 July 2016. 

2.    The article reported that “more than 700 people” had attended a “swinging event”, hosted over three days in Wales. It reported that cameras were banned at the event, but that journalists from another newspaper had attended undercover. It reported the observations of these journalists, including descriptions of the activities, and comments made to them by attendees.  The article was accompanied by a number photographs of the event, in which attendees’ faces had been pixelated.

3.    The complainant said that he was featured in one of the published photographs, which he said was taken without his knowledge and consent. He said that the photographs were taken covertly, and that the photographer and reporter had gained access to the event by deception.  The complainant also raised concern that there had been aerial photography of the event.

4.    The newspaper said that the photographer who took the photographs in the article did not buy a ticket for the event, but took the photographs standing on an open public footpath, where he could be seen by attendees. The newspaper said that no drones were used to take the pictures. 

Relevant Code Provisions 

5.  Clause 2 (Privacy) 

i) Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence, including digital communications.

ii) Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private life without consent. Account will be taken of the complainant's own public disclosures of information. 

iii) It is unacceptable to photograph individuals, without their consent, in public or private places where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. 

Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge) 

i) The press must not seek to obtain or publish material acquired by using hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices; or by intercepting private or mobile telephone calls, messages or emails; or by the unauthorised removal of documents or photographs; or by accessing digitally-held information without consent. 

ii) Engaging in misrepresentation or subterfuge, including by agents or intermediaries, can generally be justified only in the public interest and then only when the material cannot be obtained by other means. 

Mediated Outcome 

6.    The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter. 

7.    Following IPSO’s intervention, the complaint was settled privately between the parties. 

8.    As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code. 

Date complaint received: 06/07/2016

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 22/08/2016