A neighbour records a domestic row through the wall of their flat, takes the recording to a newspaper which then publishes details of the conversation. I wonder what The Guardian would have made of that in 2011 when it was on its crusade against press intrusion which led to the Leveson Inquiry – especially had the newspaper been a red-top.
Eight years ago, it was hacking into the messages on mobile phones which caused the controversy – a practice which led to criminal trials and a comprehensive, judge-led inquiry into the ethics of the press. Is it really any less offensive to record a conversation through the walls of a private flat – effectively bugging the property – and then publishing the details even when police have investigated the incident being recorded and decided no crime has taken place?
It seems that The Guardian’s moral high ground is distinctly undulating, formed of lofty peaks when it wants to have a crack at conservative-minded newspapers and deep chasms when it spies an opportunity to report the goings-on in the private life of a frontrunner in the Conservative leadership campaign.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in